FASCISM COMES TO AMERICA
FASCISM COMES TO AMERICA
BY JON NELSON
INTRODUCTION
On January 20. 2017, Donald Trump was sworn in as the 45th president of the United States. He had never before held elective office. Immediately, he began trying to implement the ideas he had discussed in his campaign. He appointed people to his cabinet who shared his vision of de-funding and/or destroying those cabinet positions. His efforts have met with unparalleled resistance from the public as well as various liberal groups. The world at large seems to be frightened as to what this administration means for the future of our planet. As I write this, we are about six months into his presidency, and already there is talk and action being taken to begin impeachment hearings. What is it about Donald Trump and his policies that seem so threatening to so many Americans? What do this administration’s goals, if implemented, mean for the future of our country and for the world at large? This article will examine Trump’s record, his campaign promises, his top appointments, the disastrous first six months, and what we can expect from his presidency in the future. The evidence compiled herein will show that this man, in addition to being the most unqualified individual ever to seek the White House, is also supremely immoral and corrupt. The evidence will show that his actions pose a greater threat not only to our safety and well-being, but that of the entire planet, than that posed by any previous administration. The end result is that, by electing Donald Trump to serve as president, the American people have, hopefully unwittingly, set the stage for a new fascistic government in the United States.
First, a few comments about where I stand politically. I am difficult to pin down in that I tend to be liberal on some social issues (but not all) and conservative on certain fiscal issues (again, not all). While I identify myself primarily as a Libertarian, there are many aspects of Libertarianism that I am vehemently opposed to. In short, I am in many ways a man without a party. Because of my dissatisfaction with both the major political parties, I see the United States on a downward spiral that, unless corrected, portends of nothing but suffering and tragedy in the future. The election of Trump conclusively proves to me that the majority of Americans are either incredibly naive in their desire to pick a leader simply because he is a political outsider, or else too ignorant to recognize the threat this man poses to all of us.
Does this mean that I am an “extreme” liberal who always votes Democratic? Far from it.
I did not like or support Barack Obama for the simple reason that, like almost all his fellow Democrats, he failed to stand up to the Republicans and their increasingly right-wing agenda, which has become more extreme with each passing year. As president, Obama was far too polite to his opponents, a politeness that was never reciprocated; he treated them as potential allies rather than as opponents whose agenda was made crystal clear back in 2008 when Obama won his first term. At that time, Republicans made it crystal clear that they would oppose every single thing he wanted, no matter how beneficial it might be to the country. Former Republican Senator George Voinovich admitted as such when he said: “If Obama wanted it, we Republicans had to be against it.” Despite this, Obama inexplicably failed to go on the offensive and with a few notable exceptions, that is the reason I have lost all respect I once had for the Democratic party; they have proven that they have no guts. They are acting exactly like the world leaders acted back in the 1930s: they are appeasers rather than statesmen who should be doing everything in their power to expose the proto-fascist state that is rapidly replacing our federal republic.
Having said that, it must be admitted that Obama did a great deal of good. For one thing, Republican lies to the contrary, government spending increased by a mere 1.4% during his administration. Compare that with the spending increases of some of his Republican predecessors (in George W. Bush’s first term, spending increased by 7.3% and by 8.1% in his second term; in Ronald Reagan’s first term, the number was 8.7% and 4.9% in his second) and Obama begins to look downright miserly! Of course, facts such as this are not about to dissuade Republican leaders and their supporters who still believe that the Democrats are the big spenders. As we will see over and over again in this article, Republican lies, errors, and generally immoral stances are rarely, if ever, supported by the facts and equally rarely reported by, much less criticized by, the mainstream media.
For the last forty or more years, the Democrats, always on the defensive, have allowed the Republican extremists to push this country further and further to the right as a complacent media has stood by and, rather than risk alienating the Republican right wing, simply presented the “new” Republicans as they want to be presented to the American public: as politically mainstream. However, their totalitarian agendas are crystal clear to anyone making any kind of effort to study the issues. My hatred for the Republican party thus runs very deep. The ultra-right has proven that they are not the least bit interested in what the majority of Americans want; instead, they have focused either on religiously-based issues that they want interpreted and enforced to their satisfaction, or else on supporting companies and industries that are destroying the planet. To cite one of countless examples of Republican dishonesty and extremism, let’s look at the Supreme Court situation.
When Obama put his nominee Merrick Garland (a man who can hardly be called an extreme liberal) up for consideration for the vacancy in the Supreme Court following the death of arch-conservative Anthony Scalia in 2016, the Republicans completely ignored their constitutional duty to consider him and vote on his appointment. Obviously, they meant it when they said that they would block everything Obama tries to do (they made similar statements when Bill Clinton was elected in 1992). This conclusively proves that today’s Republicans are obstructionists who care nothing at all for the country, but instead seek unlimited power for their own party. During the course of this article, I will show how their actions conclusively prove that what they really want is complete and total control over the lives of all Americans. Their obstructionist tactics are obvious and unrelenting: during Obama’s first term, no less than 375 bills weren’t even allowed to come to a vote because Republicans threatened to filibuster. Where was the supposedly “liberal media” when all this was happening (the same “liberal media” who rarely reports on really important issues like climate change, military over-spending, the role of the Religious Right in political affairs and, most importantly, over-population)? Republican hypocrisy and outright dishonesty was increasingly and blatantly obvious during the last few months of Obama’s administration: The same Mitch McConnell who refused to even consider Obama’s nominee said in 2005 (when Republican George W. Bush nominated ultra-conservative John Roberts to the Court) “the president, and the president alone, nominates judges.” But when the tables were turned eleven years later and Obama nominated Garland, McConnell suddenly did an about face and insisted that Obama’s successor should make the nomination. What is this if not the most blatant hypocrisy? As further proof of this, it should be noted that McConnell had, by 2013, led filibusters of 79 of Obama’s court nominees, compared with 68 in the entire previous history of the Republic. Yes, you read that correctly: Mitch McConnell, in five years, had led eleven more filibusters than had occurred in the previous 224 years of United States history. As incredible as this is, he is the same man who famously led the Senate “nuclear option” to eliminate the Democrats filibuster of the hearings on Neil Gorsuch. Obviously, filibusters are all right with McConnell—but only if they are led by Republicans. As Robert Reich of RawStory notes: “No man has done more in recent years to undermine the functioning of U.S. government than Mitch McConnell.” (RawStory April 9, 2017)
The Daily Kos, in discussing McConnell’s actions, agreed with Reich, noting: “McConnell is the embodiment of the party before country philosophy that resulted in the Trump presidency. He’s the one who will be responsible for allowing a dangerous ideologue nominated by a president who might have committed treason have a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court. And he’s the one holding the sledgehammer to destroy what’s left of the Senate as an institution.” (Joan McCarter, Daily Kos, April 3, 2017) Time after time, as we will see, the Republicans have put party interests above what the American people want.
McConnell also famously led the Republican Senate as they voted to silence Elizabeth Warren on the floor of the Senate due to the fact that she had the “audacity” to read Coretta Scott King’s letter which showed numerous examples of Jeff Session’s racism. Obviously, racism is not a disqualifying factor to key governmental appointments—at least to the Republicans. Indeed, considering Trump’s cabinet in its entirety, racism may now be an unstated pre-requisite to serving in the Trump administration.
The Morning Consult conducted a poll asking 85,000 people across the country what they thought of the senators representing them. Mitch McConnell was only able to get a 47 percent approval rating from his own state! He is the only Senator in the country not to break even in the state he represents. Thus, we may conclude that he is the most unpopular Senator in the country. The foregoing is a small example of why he is so detested.
Kerry Eleveld said it best: “He’s the walking, talking epitome of everything that’s gone wrong in American politics.” (Kerry Eleveld, Daily Kos, April 13, 2017) Mitch McConnell is a national disgrace.
But the problem does not lie with McConnell alone: How many Republicans have condemned the two-faced partisan bias he displayed during the Supreme Court nomination process? The Republican congressmen who denied a hearing for Obama’s nominee should have been removed from office and tried as traitors for refusing to do their duty as the Constitution requires. This is far from the only time that they have revealed themselves to be reactionary totalitarians. Today’s Republican leaders aren’t the least bit interested in democracy; what they do want is to run the country as a dictatorship where any opposition is either ignored or else forcibly silenced. Shades of Nazi Germany! I lump all Republicans (none of whom have disagreed with or spoken out against their traitor colleagues) together as equally guilty in the entire Supreme Court debacle, aided and abetted by the same conservative media who early the presidential campaign decided that the election wouldn’t be about issues, but about personalities. All the speeches Hillary Clinton made concerning policies and issues were either ignored or downplayed by the media. Like the Democratic party, the media outlets have proven themselves to be appeasers in exactly the same way the governments of the 1930s were appeasers to the fascists of their time. History has shown us the results, but almost nobody today seems to be listening or noting the obvious parallels with the past.
Let’s examine the issue of fascism a little more closely.
In their effort to smear liberals, right-wing demagogues have often misused terms like fascism. For example, Jonah Goldberg, senior editor for National Review is the author of a book called “Liberal Fascism.” However, the definition of fascism is: “an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.” Not left wing, but ultra-conservative right wing ideology is at the base of fascism. Goldberg and others of his ilk need to open a dictionary and then look at what Republican leaders are saying and doing to see who the real fascists are. Today’s right-wing demagogues are ideologically and temperamentally the descendants of their 1930s Nazi counterparts. Whoever said: “when fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross” hit the nail right on the head. Does this statement adequately describe liberals or conservatives? Honest Americans know the answer.
If another comparison is needed, consider this: In 1933, Adolf Hitler promised the German people that he would make Germany “great again.” Donald Trump’s campaign slogan was “Make America Great Again.” Is this mere coincidence?
Trump’s August 31, 2016 campaign speech on immigration, like so many of his other speeches as well as of his Republican cohorts, was totally fascistic in nature. While most of the media either ignored or downplayed its significance, a few praised what he said. Here is what one supporter said: “Excellent speech by Donald Trump tonight. Deport criminal aliens, end catch and release, enforce immigration laws & America First.” Who said this? None other than David Duke, former Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan. Duke was hardly alone in praising Trump. VDARE, a white supremacist website, claimed that: “In a sane country, everything Trump has proposed tonight so far would be regarded as so obviously true it wouldn’t even be up for debate.” Does anyone know of any neo-Nazi leaders on the left of the political spectrum? If so, I would be most interested in hearing their names. Sorry to say, but naziism, fascism, statism, and religious fundamentalism are only products of the extreme right-wing. I will be elaborating on this points during the course of this article.
When the Republicans broke with over two hundred years of Senatorial precedent and appointed Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, it showed the Republican’s power grab for what it was: a purely partisan effort to subvert the democratic process. Nothing that was said at the confirmation hearings had any impact on Senate Republicans. For example, Senate Minority leader Chuck Schumer pointedly asked: “I’d like to point out that it is the height of irony that Republicans held this Supreme Court seat open for nearly a calendar year while President Obama was in office, but are now rushing to fill the seat for a president whose campaign is under investigation by the FBI.” Then there is the famous “Frozen Truck Driver case.” During the hearings, Senator Al Franken questioned Gorsuch’s judgement in this case. As reported by the Daily Kos: “Sen. Franken specifically went through the merits of Judge Gorsuch’s dissenting opinion in what has been called the “Frozen Truck Driver case.” The case consisted of Gorsuch siding with big business in the firing of a trucker. The trucker was stuck in an unheated truck. His supervisor gave him two terrible options—both potentially deadly: 1)Take action, or 2) haul a trailer with frozen brakes—or sit in an unheated truck in subzero weather, potentially freezing to death. The driver had taken option three—unhitching the trailer and driving the trailerless truck to safety and warmth—an option Gorsuch said did not exist under the law.” (Walter Einenkel, Daily Kos, March 21, 2017) Sen. Franken rightly called Gorsuch’s decision “absurd.” If this were not enough, Gorsuch, during his hearing, refused to give a direct answer when queried on whether or not he thought buying a vote was corrupt.
Neil Gorsuch is often referred to as an “originalist” as was his predecessor Scalia. What this term has come to mean is that he will seek to interpret the Constitution according to what he thinks was the “original meaning” of its framers. This is misleading. The Constitution was a product of the Age of Enlightenment, which in turn was a reaction against fundamentalist Christianity’s centuries old stranglehold on government; indeed on all civilization. None of the founders, in particular James Madison who wrote the Constitution, was a religious fundamentalist; at best, most were lukewarm towards religion, while some were overtly hostile to it. The idea of separation between religion and government was central to their thinking and a core component in the promulgation of our written laws, as manifested in the Constitution. To be a true “originalist,” Gorsuch, Scalia and their colleagues on the right would recognize that the founders wanted a complete separation between religion and government and base their rulings on that clearly historical principle, but of course, being religious fundamentalists, they either cannot or will not do so. Their views and rulings are based, first and foremost, on their interpretation of scripture, and not on the founders’ understanding and intentions of Constitutional law. Today’s ultra-conservatives’ so-called “originalist” thinking consists of nothing more than interpreting the Constitution through the prism of religious fundamentalism. This is the fundamental contradiction of those espousing an “originalist” interpretation of the Constitution, a contradiction that by itself should have disqualified Neil M. Gorsuch from serving on the Supreme Court. A true “originalist” would be an avid advocate of separation between church and state.
Of course, Republicans, even if aware of these and other contradictions, choose to ignore them; they wanted Gorsuch confirmed no matter what the facts happen to be. At this point, it should have been obvious to every thinking Democratic politician that Republicans simply cannot be bargained with; the obvious and moral choice from now on would be for Democrats to block every single piece of legislation the Republicans come up with. The American people are only now getting a glimpse of how extremist today’s Republicans really are. Gorsuch’s track record is downright frightening. He tried to end judicial oversight over Guatanamo Bay detainees. He is also on record as supporting the use of secret law. Gorsuch also has no sympathy for people who choose to end their lives when facing terminal illness; he even wrote a book in which he said that the people of Oregon should not pass a death with dignity law. Clearly, Neil Gorsuch is the most rabid individual on a Supreme Court that boasts of no moderate conservatives; neither are there any real liberals, only moderates ever willing to appease their radical fellow justices. Gorsuch, like everyone Trump nominates, is a right-wing Christian Nationalist of the most dangerous kind (a key issue that will be discussed momentarily). Aided by the millions of dollars spent by the reactionary Koch brothers, his appointment was almost guaranteed to be a shoo-in. His track record is frightening to any progressive individual: He has voted in favor of corporate polluters over the health of citizens, which of course is exactly what Trump and his right-wing colleagues expect him to do. He wants to limit people’s access to the courts. He rules in favor of right-wing Christians and their alleged “freedom” to discriminate against those they disagree with (religious “freedom” is another issue to be discussed below). He insists that spending huge amounts of money to support political candidates is a “fundamental right.” Clearly, Neil Gorsuch is not the least bit interested in protecting the health, rights and interests of the American people. Gorsuch is a horrible man, a big business crony who has no interest whatever in serving the people he is supposed to represent.
Having duly noted all this, it is time now to turn our attention to Donald Trump and his colleagues, after which we will examine the connections between the Republican party, fundamentalist religion, and the pro to theo-fascist state now emerging. Let us begin by examining a few actual facts about our (probably) illegitimate president, not the kind of false-facts that have become so popular of late with Republicans, and see if we as a people should, as many have claimed, “just give him a chance.” This is particularly ironic that Trump supporters should say this. Where were they back in 2008 when Mitch McConnell promised to fight everything Obama tried to accomplish? Conspicuously silent, of course.
Let’s start off by examining Trump’s campaign slogan. We have already noted that Hitler used the same slogan when he became dictator of Nazi Germany. But when exactly was America great? When exactly were these halcyon days of yore that Trump and his Republican supporters long for? Not surprisingly, no specifics have been forthcoming from any leading conservatives. Do they want us to return to slavery days? Given the increasing rise and prominence of hate groups since Trump’s nomination, this doesn’t seem at all to be a stretch of the imagination. Was America great when we violated all our treaties with native Americans and forced them out of their homelands? Again, this doesn’t seem at all inconsistent with Trump’s stated agenda; simply transpose “Muslim” for “native American” and the connection seems obvious. Was America great when women and blacks were second class citizens and were not able to vote, either by law (women) or by threats of violence (blacks)? Once again, we see an alarming connection between past and present: Today, Trump is determined to limit certain people’s access to the polling booth. Was America great when it stood idly by as Hitler rose to power and systematically destroyed all those he deemed to be enemies of the state? Were we great during World War II when we imprisoned Japanese Americans in internment camps? Where we great when Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger approved the invasion of three sovereign nations during the Vietnam War?
Yes, America is a great country, but our leaders, almost to a man, have fallen far short of the ideals this country was founded on.
Trump has proven over and over again that he has no real policies formulated. Take the issue of immigration. Despite his ridiculous promise that: “we are going to build a wall,” he ignores what would happen if undocumented workers were somehow magically removed from the scene. The result would be nothing less than the total economic collapse of most southwest economies that rely on this form of cheap labor for their livelihood. Blustering, bluffing, pandering and lying are much easier than thinking critically and coming up with real workable solutions. As with his many other unworkable and irrational ideas, Trump’s strategy is crystal clear: he comes up with a vague idea that he thinks will win him brownie points with his supporters, and then leaves it to others to try and put together a coherent plan. When it does, he blames others, usually Democrats and the media but, increasingly of late, even members of his own party and administration.
How honest is this man? Both during his campaign and after taking the oath of office, Trump pointedly said he would not release his tax returns, even though he had earlier promised to do so. That makes him a liar. Releasing his tax returns (which is something every presidential candidate has done for the last forty years) could show the obvious conflict of interest between his multitudinous business interests and his duties as president. At his first press conference following his election, Trump waved aside the issue by saying: “only reporters care” about his releasing the tax returns. Without question, Trump is not being honest; he wants secrecy on his own financial affairs, as evidenced by his turning away the press corps and requesting top-secret clearance for his family to run his businesses. This man is in control of untold amounts of government data; can he and his minions be trusted with this? As president, Trump has access to the country’s top federal agencies and the most important information in the country. What is to stop him should he decide to destroy this information? After Watergate, such actions were no longer unthinkable, but now loom as a very real possibility.
And of course, the Republican controlled Senate refuses to call Trump out on his failure to keep his promise on the tax returns. The Daily Kos noted: “Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-New Jersey) introduced a resolution to have the House Ways & Committee privately review Trump’s tax returns in closed session, under a law that empowers them to do so. The resolution failed on a party-line vote: not a single Republican voted ‘yes.’” (Paul Hogarth, Daily Kos, March 2, 2017)
Despite conservative mule-headedness on the issue, a 1924 tax law exists which gives Congress the power to examine tax returns for the purpose of determining whether or not conflicts of interest are occurring. This law applies to everyone, on up to and including the president of the United States. To date, only one person, Congressman Bill Pascrell of New Jersey, has called for using this law to examine Trump’s tax returns but, not surprisingly, he got nowhere.
Trump planned an event whereby he said he would leave his company—then suddenly canceled the event! This is another example of his willingness to lie. His resolution of the problem? He said he would keep ownership of all his businesses and let his children run the companies. Of course, the only way for him to avoid the problem would be for him to put his assets into a blind fund with an independent manager, one not at all connected to his family. Trump, not surprisingly has refused to do this. The obvious conflicts of interest are not a concern of his, nor of his fellow Republicans.
These conflicts are blatant and even impeachable. On April 11, 2017, Credo Action reported: “When Eric Trump, Donald Trump’s son, went to Uruguay for a business trip in January, U.S. taxpayers shelled out $100,000, including tens of thousands of dollars renting rooms in Trump hotel. While many of Trump’s schemes are complicated, forcing taxpayers to pay for fancy rooms and food at his hotels is blatantly corrupt. Doing so while proposing cuts that hurt the most vulnerable is appalling…Some estimates say it costs $1 million a day to protect Melania Trump in New York City and $3 million for every one of Trump’s trips to Mar-a-Lago. There was even talk that the Secret Service would have to pay to rent a floor at Trump Tower to provide protection…Trump’s massive web of corruption is on a never-before-seen scale. Past presidents have sold their assets and placed money and investments in blind trusts. Trump, by contrast, claims to be handing over his businesses to his children. But he reportedly still receives regular updates on Trump Organization earnings, and no one knows the full extent of Trump’s foreign financial and business entanglements because of his unprecedented secrecy and refusal to release his tax returns. Government ethics experts have already said Trump is likely violating the Constitution by personally profiting from the presidency and called his pretend show of giving his sons control of his company “meaningless.” (Murshed Zaheed, Credo Action, April 11, 2017) This is unconscionable; Trump is engaging in the worst kind of cronyism and must be called to task for it. Less than three months into his administration, as this article was written, ethics experts already possessed enough information on Trump’s shady business dealings to bring it to the attention of higher authorities—not that those authorities would have listened.
Even prior to Trump’s actual swearing in, Kurt Walters of Demand Progress noted the potential for illegality on December 15, 2016: “Bipartisan ethics groups and experts have been sounding the alarm about Trump’s conflicts. He owes hundreds of millions to a foreign bank facing massive fines from the U.S. Justice Department he will soon control, has used official calls with political leaders from Turkey to Great Britain to push the Trump Organization’s business interests, and Trump hotels are encouraging foreign diplomats to book stays at Trump properties to buy influence.” And: “With business entanglements in 20 foreign countries, constitutional experts say Trump will violate the Constitution on Day One, breaching the ‘Emoluments Clause’ prohibition on payments from foreign governments to public officials.” The Emoluments Clause states: “no person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign state.” The word “emolument” means (at least in the context of the late eighteenth century) that the president cannot have any profits other than that associated with his office. Granted that interpretation of this clause may be exceedingly difficult for the courts, the present understanding seems to be that Trump is treading on legal thin ice by refusing to sever his allegiance with foreign dignitaries who he has extensive personal and professional business dealings with. What is clear is that the authors of the Constitution were extremely wary of foreign entanglements of any kind. Not surprisingly Republicans have failed to show any interest in these blatant conflicts of interest, further proof of their contempt for the U.S. Constitution.
Trump has also guested on Alex Jones’s Infowars radio show, and praised Jones’ “amazing” reputation. He also promised not to “let him down.” This is a perfect example of Trump’s disdain for common moral decency: Jones is well-known for promoting the conspiracy theory that Connecticut’s Sandy Hook School shooting of 2012 was a hoax. Trump, like all Republicans, owes much to the gun lobby, but even so, this is an unbelievably cruel slap in the face of those who lost loved ones at this school. Surviving family members have been repeatedly verbally attacked by the self-proclaimed “Sandy Hook truthers” who claim that the grieving families, police, federal government, neighbors, photographers, and others are all part of a massive conspiracy to delude the American public into thinking that the massacre was real. Jones buys into this nonsense; is this evidence of his “amazing” reputation? Should the President of the United States be promoting such nonsense? Who is calling him to task on this? The answer is painfully obvious: No one. And that speaks volumes about the current political environment in this country.
Sandy Hook is not the only example of Trump’s willingness to buy into bizarre and crackpot conspiracy theories, or at least not to call them out as such. He has yet to say whether or not he believes the Sandy Hook school shooting was a hoax. He likewise has said that he believed President Obama has a birth certificate outside the United States (which he eventually grudgingly renounced), that Justice Scalia may have been murdered, and that Ted Cruz’s father played a role in President Kennedy’s assassination (!)
Every president takes the Oath of Office with a promise to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Given some of Trump’s words, actions, and promises, it is obvious that these words have no meaning to him (or to his fellow Republican theocrats). To cite but one example, Trump’s choice for Secretary of Defense was retired General James Mattis, but there are Constitutional problems with this inasmuch as there is a seventy-year-old federal law that bars servicemen from holding senior defense posts unless they have been retired from service for seven years. Mattis has only been retired for three years. The point of this law is to ensure that the military must always be subordinate to the people. Trump’s apparent willingness to ignore this law and the Constitution shows that he values the strong arm of the military over the will of the people. Put another way, Trump favors his own choices over the demands of the Constitution. And of course, congressional Republicans announced that they were ready and willing to amend the law and were once again threatening to shut down the government if they didn’t get their way. As the Daily Kos noted: “Because the modern Republican Party is too dysfunctional to pass a proper budget, the only way the federal government gets funded these days is through a series of short-term ‘continuing resolutions’ that give the GOP frequent opportunities to throw damaging tantrums.” (David Nir, Daily Kos, December 6, 2016) Fortunately, the Republicans soon after renounced their intention to shut down the government, a rare concession to common sense. Even so, their inability to find an adequate replacement for the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) is a stark case of just how dysfunctional the Republican party actually is.
Getting back to Mattis, Trump seems to have a decidedly hands-off approach to the military, leaving its top commanders to make strategic decisions by themselves. This is further proof of the fact that Trump is simply incapable of running or supervising things for himself; he appoints people to certain positions with the understanding that they will promote his interests. And when the results prove to be disastrous, he blames others for his own administrative failings. Leaving the military to its own devices has already had disastrous ramifications: During the past six months, the Pentagon has been accused of more indiscriminate bombings, many of them on civilians, than in the past. The rise of rogue commanders is now a distinct possibility.
TRUMP’S ADMINISTRATION
Let us now examine some of the other people who have had or will have significant influence during Trump’s presidency.
Steve Bannon is the White House Chief Strategist. A significant position, to be sure. So who is this man? His attitudes toward women would disgrace a Neanderthal: he said in a 2011 radio interview that progressive, educated women are “dykes.” (Political Vision radio, 2011) His second wife accused him of domestic abuse, but dropped the charges when she was threatened by him and his lawyer. As with so many on the far right, Bannon’s anti-semitism is extreme and well-documented; he has ties to white nationalism and the alt-right. For example, during his divorce proceedings he stated that he did not want his daughters sent to the Archer School for girls because that school has too many Jewish children and that Jews raise their children to be brats. Of course, a spokesperson for Bannon denied the charge. Not disproved it, mind you, just denied it. Bannon, who ran the right-wing news site Breitbart prior to his appointment, has been called racist, misogynist, and even fascistic; is this mere verbiage, or is there something tangible to back up such name-calling? To answer, consider some of the news titles that appeared in Breitbart under his supervision: “Bill Kristol: Republican spoiler, renegade Jew,” “Birth control makes women unattractive and crazy,” “Would you rather your child had feminism or cancer?” and “Gay rights have made us dumber, it’s time to get back in the closet.” ( Emily Schultheis, Julia Boccagno, CBS News November 16, 2016, 6:19 AM). As Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid noted: “President-elect Trump’s choice of Steve Bannon as his top aide signals that white supremacists will be represented at the highest levels in Trump’s White House.” (Jessica McBride, Heavy News, November 15, 2016) Clearly, the epithets heaped on him are more than justified. Only in Trump’s America could such a man gain such undeserved power. And, again not surprisingly, no Republican has come forth condemning this man’s overt racism and track record of bigotry. If any Republican is bothered by Bannon, they certainly aren’t making any noise about it.
Already, Bannon is having significant influence. As chief strategist in the Trump White House, he has already helped to legitimize hatred against women, minorities, and anyone else not deemed to be “with us.” A story about the alleged “deep state” attempting to undermine the president has been picked up by the right-wing press, most notably Sean Hannity. In addition, Bannon is making every effort to weaken the Government Accountability office and other offices that serve to monitor the power of the White House. Bigot, race monger, misogynist, corrupt public official—Steve Bannon is, in every sense, a thoroughly despicable man who has no business holding any kind of power. He is a grave threat to America. The only silver lining in this dark cloud was seen when Trump, after originally having named Bannon to the National Security Council, removed him from that post on April 5, 2017.
Then there’s Kris Kobach, a most enthusiastic denigrator of Muslims. He not only wholly supports Trump’s ludicrous plan to “build a wall,” he has even said they may begin building the wall without congressional approval. Even quoting Trump’s lowest estimate (eight billion dollars) of building a 35 to 50 foot 2000 mile long wall, how on earth would he be able to get that kind of funding without Congressional approval and the approval of the citizens of the United States? Most ludicrous of all, Trump tweeted on April 23, 2017: “Eventually, but at a later date so we can get started early, Mexico will be paying, in some form, for the badly needed border wall.” A statement such as this shows how detached from reality Trump is. Clearly Kobach and his boss are talking through their hats; Kobach’s racism is another story and will be examined in a moment. There are other Trump appointees and would-be appointees to consider first.
I have already mentioned Myron Ebell who was an early favorite to head the EPA. Where is the protection coming from here? Exactly what is being protected? Ebell, like his boss has said that climate change is nothing to worry about and has called those scientists speaking of global warming a “gang” who have been “cooking the data.” (Michael Brune, Sierra Club, November 20.2016) Like his boss and other cabinet appointees, this man is so far removed from reality that he has said more CO2 emissions are actually good for the atmosphere! And this is the man who was to be in charge of protecting us from pollution! Ebell has been funded by some of the globe’s biggest polluters, including Marathon Petroleum and Koch Industries. He has no scientific credentials of any kind, but this hasn’t stopped him from attacking those who do. The Daily Kos called him “one of the single greatest threats our planet has ever faced.” (December 1, 2016) Ebell will not rest until the EPA is completely gutted. As Michael Brune noted: “That will likely mean lights out for the Clean Power Plan. Adios to the Paris Agreement. Free rein for honeybee-killing pesticides. And the pullback of 100 enforcement actions designed to protect the public from lead exposure in the wake of the Flint, MI disaster.” Add to that the destruction of wetlands, eliminating methane emission regulations, and you have a man who quite literally threatens the survival of our species. Brune also wrote: “Ebell actually wrote an article in Forbes called, “Love Global Warming,” where he said warmer temperatures would make colder regions more inhabitable. And for the rest? “…the higher temperatures are killing people who are likely to die soon anyway.” How reassuring!
In a notice sent out by the Sierra Club on December, 22, 2016, it was noted that in 2016, 44% of the bee colonies in the United States were destroyed, primarily due to two causes: one, the spraying of the insecticide for Zika, and two, bee-killing “neonic” pesticides used by Bayer and Syngenta which are used throughout the country. Ebell’s response? He denies that scientific reports linking bee deaths with neonics are accurate. He offers no facts, no evidence to the contrary, just denial. This is yet another example of the Trump administration’s steadfast denial of any facts that disturb their view of the world (or, more accurately, disturb the corporate polluters who are causing this ecological devastation). A showdown between Trump’s administration and the scientific community may be the eventual scenario and if this is the case, rest assured that the Republicans will use every means at their disposal, no matter how falsely dishonest, to discredit the opposition.
On December 8, 2016, Trump decided instead on Scott Pruitt to head the EPA. Keep in mind that the EPA’s stated mission is “to protect human health and the environment.” The choice of Pruitt is certainly no better than Ebell since Pruitt, Oklahoma’s former Attorney General, is every bit as determined to attack the EPA and ultimately destroy it. In fact, when he was Oklahoma’s attorney general, Pruitt actually “sued the EPA to block the implementation of the Clean Water Rule, which protects drinking water sources used by one in three Americans.” (Anna Aurillo, Environment America Federal Legislative director, January 22, 2017) In fact, “He has sued the EPA a whopping 14 times and has personally received nearly $350,000 from fossil fuel interests over the course of his career.” (Kristin Brown, League of Conservation Voters, February 3, 2017) On June 27, 2012, it was announced that Pruitt had just proposed the repeal of the Clean Water Rule. This was done in conjunction with Trump’s ordering the EPA to begin eliminating Clean Water Act protections for nearly two million miles of our country’s streams. The result of Trump and Pruitt’s actions is that 117 million Americans will be drinking dirtier water. Environment America notes: “The rule prevents coal companies from dumping waste into mountain streams, developers and oil companies from paving over or building pipelines through our wetlands, and factory farms from polluting our rivers, lakes and bays with animal manure—ultimately protecting drinking water sources of one in three Americans.” (Margie Alt, Environment America, June 27, 2017) Does this make any kind of sense?
Pruitt, like his boss, is a man singularly unconcerned with human health and well-being. The issue of mining is but one example of this. The Los Angeles Times ran an article on the health of miners, noting that in earlier times they brought canaries into the mines; if they died, it indicated the presence of toxic gases. The article notes: “The Trump administration has decided to use children and farmworkers as 21st century canaries, continuing their exposure to a pesticide named chlorpyrifos that has been linked to serious health concerns….This is the same chemical that Scott Pruitt, the new administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, refused to ban in March, despite the advice of EPA scientists.” (Carl F. Cranor, Los Angeles Times, June 7, 2017) Chlorpyrifos is a modern-day descendent of a nerve gas that was invented by the Nazis. The article goes on to note that chlorpyrifos is: “one of 12 well-understood and carefully studied neurotoxicants that can adversely affect brain development.” This is more then another example of an administration hostile toward science; it indicates that Pruitt and the Trump administration are ever willing to allow business to continue along the same path, with no significant adjustments or changes, no matter how many people are forced to suffer the consequences.
Pruitt is of course another climate change denier, in addition to being a most enthusiastic supporter of Big Oil and other corporate polluters. He is therefore determined to gut Obama’s Clean Power Plan. On February 2, 2017, the Republicans on the EPW (Environment and Public Works Committee), discarded the rules and, even though Pruitt had not fully answered questions about his obvious conflicts of interest with the fossil fuel industry, forced his confirmation through to the full Senate. This is yet another of the countless examples of how Republicans want to subvert the rules in order to get what they want.
The Guardian summarizes Pruitt’s intentions, noting that he: “has spearheaded a concerted effort to excise or delay dozens of environmental rules. Emissions standards for cars and trucks, the clean power plan, water pollution restrictions, a proposed ban on a pesticide linked to developmental problems in children, regulations that stop power plants dumping toxins such as mercury into their surrounds–all have been targeted with efficacious zeal by Pruitt.” The article summarizes the situation as follows: “In less than six months, Trump has begun to tear up almost all of the key planks of Barack Obama’s environmental agenda. This blitzkrieg is likely to slow now that it faces a thicket of legal action launched by enraged environmental groups and some states, such as New York. But to Trump’s supporters, the president, who pledged during the campaign to reduce the EPA to ‘tidbits,’ is delivering on his crusade to transport the environmental and industrial outlook of the late 19th century to the modern day.(Oliver Milman,The Guardian, July 19, 2017)
The previously mentioned destruction of bee colonies is a serious threat. At present, hundreds of bee species are declining and may soon face extinction. There is massive evidence that certain pesticides currently in use that are in large part guilty for the bee population decline. Despite this evidence, the companies that make the pesticides steadfastly refuse to take them off the market. Environment America explains: “A new report by the United Nations finds that the idea that pesticides are necessary to feed the world’s growing population is a myth. So why are we still spraying our crops with bee-killing pesticides? Why, when it’s bees, not pesticides, that make our farms and food possible? Neonicotinoids are the most commonly used class of pesticides in the U.S. They’re 6,000 times more toxic than DDT—and they’ve been linked to massive bee die-offs. Their continued use makes no sense — not when we stand to lose so much. Not when bees pollinate 71 of the 100 crops that provide 90 percent of the world’s food. Not when more than 40% of invertebrate pollinators are facing extinction, including eight bee species that have already been added to the endangered species list. And especially not when neonicotinoid use has been linked to a 50 percent drop in honeybee populations in the U.S. and the U.K. over the past 25 years. In their attempts to grow more food, they’re actually destroying the bees that make growing food possible.” (Anna Aurillo, Environment America, April 25, 2017) While there has been some progress of late (Home Depot and Lowe’s, for example, have agreed to stop selling neonics, a pesticide that is largely responsible for the bee die-off), the appointment of Scott Pruitt does not bode well for the future of the bee population, to say the least.
Putting Scott Pruitt in charge of the EPA is, as Michael Brune of the Sierra Club noted: “like putting an arsonist in charge of fighting fires.” (Michael Brune, Sierra Club, December 7, 2016) Even if the EPA survives, it will be guided by the much-beloved “alternative facts” (meaning lies) favored by Republicans rather than actual provable facts.
If all this were not enough, the New York Times exposed what should have been yet another major Republican scandal: Journalists found that letters supposedly authored by Pruitt which challenged Federal clean air regulators were not authored by him at all, but instead by various energy lobbyists, who in gratitude made major contributions to his campaign fund. On February 2, 2017, Republicans again broke committee rules to pick Pruitt. This was done on the Senate floor without a single Democrat present, another example of Republican neo-fascism. This was done even though Senate rules require two members of the minority party (Democrats) to be present. There’s even more: Two weeks later, on February 16, 2017, a Federal judge ordered Pruitt to disclose the numerous emails (as many as 3,000) he made to his pals in the fossil fuel industry. The next day, the Republican-led Senate, without even discussing the emails, pushed Pruitt’s nomination through. This is standard operating procedure for the current Republican party: Just ignore the facts and any disquieting information that stands in the way of what they want to accomplish. If this isn’t neo-fascism, then what is it?
It should be reiterated at this point just how important the EPA is to this country and to every American. As noted by Andrew Linhardt of the Sierra Club: “Passenger vehicles account for about half of all the oil we burn in the U.S. But thanks to the standards set by the Obama administration, the efficiency of vehicles across all classes is improving, spurring innovation, cutting oil use, reducing emissions, and saving drivers money at the pump.” (Andrew Linhardt, Sierra Club, December 11, 2016) The pollution standards that have been set will not only make our air cleaner, it will reduce our dependence on oil and save American families almost two trillion dollars. But even though this is a win-win situation for all Americans and for the environment, Republican leaders, beholden as they are to big oil, won’t have any of it. It doesn’t take too much imagination to predict what will become of groups like the South Coast Quality Management District (AQMD) which is dedicated to implementing rules that will hold corporate polluters responsible for cleaning up the mess they create that affects the air quality seventeen million people are breathing.
Pruitt is just one of many Republicans who ignore the law whenever possible. Environment America has provided us with one example: “A federal judge has ruled that Scott Pruitt’s EPA broke the law when it failed to consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) before approving 59 new pesticide products containing neonicotinoids. If the EPA had done its job, the USFWS would have pointed out that neonics pose a specific threat to an endangered species of honeybee.” (Anna Aurillo, Environment America, May 25, 2017)
Jeff Sessions, Trump’s choice for Attorney General, is head of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division and Voting Rights Section and will, despite his post, be leading the charge for more voter suppression. This man was rejected for a federal judgeship by his fellow Republicans in 1986 due to his relentless prosecution of civil rights activists and, equally importantly, because of his overtly racist comments such as calling civil rights groups like the NAACP “un-American.” That group noted that Sessions has: “a failing record on other civil rights; a record of racially offensive remarks and behavior; and [a] dismal record on criminal justice reform issues.” (Bill Moyers, Daily Kos, January 13, 2017) The article also noted that: “He called the Voting Rights Act of 1965 ‘an intrusion’ before cynically voting to reauthorize it and then quickly signing on to a Republican effort to undermine it.” He constantly referred to a black subordinate as “boy.” What could be more racist and condescending than this?
Session’s position gives him the power and authority to investigate, intimidate and harass environmental groups with impunity. Like most of his conservative counterparts, he believes in the inerrancy of the bible and, again like most fundamentalist Christians, he is extremely homophobic, as evidenced by his voting against the Matthew Shepard Act, which would have added violence against the LGBT community to their list of hate crimes. He also insisted that protection from hate crimes against the LGBT community serves to “cheapen the Civil Rights movement.” As if he was ever in favor of the Civil Rights Movement in the first place! Sessions is also anti-woman, and voted against re-authorizing the Violence Against Women Act, saying that he didn’t consider grabbing women by their genitalia to be “sexual assault.” One can only wonder what in his view would actually constitute sexual assault. He also voted against legislation that would protect abortion providers from violence. Apparently, killing an abortion doctor is OK with Sessions. Although he claims to be anti-racist, Sessions has by his statements and actions proved the contrary: An outspoken critic of the Civil Rights Act Sessions, as a US attorney, prosecuted blacks for daring to exercise their right to vote. The Washington Post, commenting on Sessions’ racism, noted that he: “joked about the Ku Klux Klan, saying he thought they were ‘okay’, until he learned that they smoked marijuana.” (Amber Phillips, Washington Post, January 10, 2017) And Ted Cruz has the audacity to say the KKK is the party of the Democrats?
Sessions, like all of Trump’s appointees (and all fundamentalist Christians), is an outspoken critic of church/state separation, a constitutional foundation that he insists is an “extra-constitutional doctrine” and “a recent thing that is unhistorical and unconstitutional.” (Rokia Hassanein, Church and State, January 2017) This article also noted that: “Sessions has attacked secular government, supports government—erected Ten Commandments displays, backs creationism being taught in public school science classrooms, has called a Muslim ban ‘biblical’ and believes religious views can trump reproductive and LGBTQ rights. He’s openly expressed his support for taxpayer money funding religious schools.” Sessions even went so far as to sue Americans United, publishers of Church and State for having the audacity to send letters to various church leaders throughout the country reminding them that endorsing political candidates from the pulpit endangers their tax-exempt status. Sessions called this “voter intimidation” on AU’s part. Although he lost the suit, the lessons that he should have learned obviously were not. Sessions has spent his whole career fighting against civil rights.
Like virtually all Republicans today, Sessions is ignorant of the dangers posed by the intermingling of church and state. Barry Lynn had this to say on the matter: “Nations that don’t have separation tend to fall into one of two categories: nightmarish theocracies favored by Iranian mullahs and the Islamist extremists of ISIS or the established churches that still cling to life in some European nations. The first is a recipe for oppression, and the second results in devitalized churches that do little more than provide pomp and ceremony for the state.” (Barry Lynn, Church and State, February, 2017) The same article quotes Dr. Neal Jones: “If your church hierarchy opposes abortion, don’t have one. If your religious dogma teaches that homosexual marriage is a sin, don’t marry someone of the same sex. But your freedom to live as you choose is the same freedom that allows others to live as they choose.” This is the key point that is completely lost on Sessions, Trump, and virtually everyone else in the Republican party: Religious freedom means that you have the right to practice your religion any way you choose, as long as practicing it does not inadvertently harm someone else. It does not mean you have the right to keep others from practicing their religion (or having no religion at all) any way they choose. Only theocracies allow people (or the state) to interfere in the way other people practice their religion. In other words, mind your own business when it comes to religion!
Sessions is also a proven liar. The Russian scandal alone proves this. During his Senate confirmation hearing, he testified under oath that he “did not have communication with the Russians.” In fact, he met with them at least twice, once in his Capitol Hill office, and the other time at the Republican National Convention. Let the Republicans try and lie their way out of that one: Sessions perjured himself, and anyone who perjures himself should not be allowed to serve the people of the United States. Trump should have demanded his resignation, but of course he failed to do so. Lies, scandals and racism: it’s all OK as long as it is being done by Republicans; after all, since they’re fundamentalist Christians, that has to make them moral, or so they want us to believe.
Among other things, Sessions is the worst type of hypocrite. Back in 1999, when President Bill Clinton was embroiled in the Republican-led impeachment effort because he was alleged to have lied about his extra-marital affair, Sessions was outspokenly in favor of his removal from office, saying: “The President is at the helm of the executive branch of the Government, which is charged with enforcing the law. What use is it for the Congress to make the law and the courts to interpret the law, if the President does not enforce it? We must bring the power of the three branches of government back into balance. Otherwise, it is a threat to the structure of the Government. Similarly, the law should be applied to each citizen equally. Otherwise, it is a breach of the public trust. Clearly, the public good is served by removing this President.” Yet he refuses to apply the same standards to a president who is a much worse liar than Clinton ever was. In this, he shows himself, as do most other Republicans, to be more interested in supporting his political party than he is in serving the American people. There is no other word to describe something like this other than hypocrisy.
Of course, Sessions is not the only appointee to lie during his confirmation hearings. Scott Pruitt said, under oath, that he had never used a private email account to conduct business when he was serving as Oklahoma’s attorney general—except that he had. And Vice President Pence has been caught in a similar scandalous situation. The Daily Kos noted that: “Pence adamantly criticized Clinton throughout the 2016 presidential campaign, accusing her of hiding her emails from the public, and thus allowing classified information to become vulnerable to hackers. Now, Pence calls the similarities to his emails and Clinton’s emails ‘absurd,’ but cybersecurity experts say Pence’s emails were most ‘likely as insecure as Clinton’s.’ And though there has only been speculation that Clinton’s emails were hacked, Pence’s account was definitely hacked last summer and used by a scammer who most likely also had access to all of Pence’s emails and contact information.” (Leslie Salzillo, Daily Kos, March 3, 2017) Clearly, there is no limit to the lies, evasions, and scandals Republican leaders are willing to allow as long as they get the control they want. But then, what should we expect from an administration as openly dishonest as this one?
Clearly, Jeff Sessions is a man who is dangerously unqualified to hold any kind of office at all, much less one of the highest in the land, one which makes him responsible for enforcing our country’s civil rights laws. This should be unsettling to anyone who does not think and act exactly as he does, meaning to any thinking American. His appointment is an insult and a threat to millions of Americans. And, not surprisingly, the totalitarian Republicans in the Senate tried to “ram through Jeff Sessions’ nomination for Attorney General by cutting his hearings short and only allowing Democrats to call four witnesses. And Sessions’ hasn’t even submitted a completed questionnaire to the committee that will question his fitness to be Attorney General – a move he once said was a felony.” (Kate Kizer, Demand Progress, January 9, 2017) Jeff Sessions may represent Republican “values” but he certainly doesn’t represent American values. What he does represent is the interests of the resurgent Christian Nationalists who now have a voice: The voice of a century and a half ago, which sought to keep blacks and other minorities “in their place.”
On January 9, 2017, the Washington Post reported that Sessions omitted important details about his financial stakes in an oil company when he submitted financial disclosure forms to the Senate Judiciary Committee. (“Sessions failed to disclose oil interests as required, ethics experts say,” The Washington Post, January 9, 2017) Republicans responded in typical manner: they tried to rush his nomination through, correctly surmising that a detailed examination of Sessions’ record would have shown that he cannot possibly be entrusted to be a fair and impartial Attorney General: By electing Trump, the American people have also inadvertently selected an avowed racist who will be in charge of enforcing laws ranging from civil rights to voting rights, environmental protection, housing, and employment. Jeff Sessions will certainly seek to enact new laws, but they will be laws based on discrimination and repression as he and his colleagues seek to make the United States into a rejuvenated version of the antebellum Jim Crow South.
It has become increasingly obvious that the Trump administration is, simply put, anti-science. Another example of this was provided by the Daily Kos: “In late April, under the Trump administration, the charter for the National Commission on Forensic Science was not renewed. This means that the independent commission group of researchers, lawyers, judges, crime lab technicians, scientists and law enforcement officers who worked on trying to reform the field of forensic science and expert testimony are no longer at work. The message: important things like trying to promote scientific validity and improving federal coordination of forensic science are a waste of time and resources in the Trump era. This administration seems to have an aversion to all things scientific.” (Kelly Macias, Daily Kos, April 24, 2017) The article goes on: “…On the witness stand, experts routinely overstate the certainty of their forensic methods…Just think about it. Juries could be sentencing people to death in cases where bite mark evidence is used and yet some forensic dentists might not even agree if the markings are caused by human teeth. How is that even possible? With these kinds of statistics, you’d think the attorney general would be a staunch supporter of trying to advocate for reform in forensic science. (But) questions about the reliability of forensic methods irked him because they hurt prosecutors’ ability to win convictions based on forensic evidence; calls for more oversight contradicted his desire to see local law enforcement unencumbered by federal oversight or regulation.” With forensic evidence inadmissible in court, the way is paved for much higher conviction rates, no matter how faulty the evidence might be. Clearly, Sessions wants to throw the baby out with the bathwater: don’t reform, just destroy.
After Sessions was confirmed as the new Attorney General, he was congratulated by Troy Newman, head of the anti-abortion organization Operation Rescue. Newman is on record as saying that abortion providers should be executed. There is little doubt that Sessions will actively support proven terrorist organizations such as Operation Rescue.
Unsurprisingly, at least to those of us who follow these things, the mainstream media barely covered any of this. Sessions was given a virtual free pass to his position and few if any of these unsettling facts were reported. One can only ask: Why not?
Another winner is Frank Gaffney who was reported as being an advisor to the transition team. Yet another well-known bigot and leader of the Center for Security Policy, (designated as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center) Gaffney, like others on Trump’s transition team, is extremely paranoid about what he views as Islamic terrorism destroying our country. Of course, the idea of Christian terrorism doing the same thing (Christianity has a much worse historical track record on terrorism than does Islam) never enters into his consciousness, or the consciousness of other self-righteous Christians and their leaders. Team Trump wants to create a “Muslim registry” which, in addition to being unconstitutional and a threat to our democracy, is an insult to any thinking American. This registry would give government the power to harass people on the basis of their religious beliefs. Today it would be the Muslims; tomorrow, it could be anyone else. Amazingly, Trump’s team even used the Japanese American internment camps of the Second World war as a precedent! Think of what this means: if something as un-American and immoral as the internment camps can be put into effect, what would be the next step? Harassment of anyone else could become “business as usual,” whether the “offender” is Muslim, Jewish, atheist, black, native American, LGBT, or anything else the right-wing doesn’t like. This is another step toward a totally fascistic, one-party state.
As further proof of the coming of a new totalitarian government, consider this: Major tech companies such as Google and Apple are already in the business of collecting information from their customers and “sharing” it with the government. So the government is already conducting mass surveillance on the American people. Again, there is precedent for this in the Second World War, when American multi-nationalist organizations such as IBM colluded with the Nazis to help them organize their system of mass slaughter against the Jews of Europe and others viewed as “enemies of the state.” And, most ominously, within days of Trump’s victory, IBM offered its services to him. As poet and philosopher George Santayana (1863-1952) once noted: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” So much for the oft-repeated Republican line that they want to get government “off our backs.”
Trump named Wall Street billionaire Wilbur Ross as his Secretary of Commerce. This is not surprising for many reasons, not the least of which is the fact that back in the 1980s, Trump found himself in financial trouble as the real estate marked in New York City began to fizzle. Trump owned three casinos in Atlantic City, all of which were threatened from lenders. Trump went straight to Ross, who at the time was the senior managing director of Rothschild Inc. Ross bailed him out, allowing Trump to keep his casinos and rebuilt his various other business interests. Ross, himself a multi-billionaire, made most of his money operating as a “vulture investor.” He has earned the telling sobriquet “The King of Bankruptcy” and famously offshored various textile jobs to Mexico and China. Corruption is no stranger to Ross: He was able to start his International Coal Group free of labor unions, health care, and workers’ pensions. He has been the subject of numerous lawsuits, including one brought by South Carolina investors in which he settled with a $81 million lawsuit out of court. Two years later, in August 2016, Ross agreed to reimburse investors in the amount of $11.8 million and also to pay a fine of $2.3 million to settle a Securities and Exchange Commission investigation into the company’s misappropriation of fees. The Sago Mine disaster of 2006, in which twelve miners lost their lives, received extensive media coverage worldwide. Ross, who according to Roddy Boyd of the New York Post “had been intimately involved with the company that owned the West Virginia mine” knew all about the various safety problems; the mine had twelve roofing collapses the previous year. Despite the fact that the United States Department of Labor cited 208 safety violations, 96 of which were considered S&S (significant and substantial), Ross refused to shut down the mine. Congress, the Department of Labor, and the State of West Virginia are all currently investigating this matter, or at least say they are. Like so many others (perhaps all) in the Trump administration, this is a thoroughly evil and corrupt individual.
Steve Mnuchin was named as Trump’s Secretary of the Treasury. Mnuchin, like several of Trump’s cabinet appointees, is a former banker for Goldman-Sachs, which means that, according to Kurt Walters of rootstrikers.org: “The guy who ran for office promising to “drain the swamp” is putting the living embodiment of Wall Street corruption in charge of his economic policy.” (rootstrikers.org. December 1, 2016) Walters noted that: “Mnuchin was Trump’s top fundraiser, and his record is so corrupt, it’s unbelievable, even for Trump. Check it out: 1) During the depths of the mortgage meltdown, his company OneWest foreclosed on 36,000 homes, including those of elderly retirees, using robo-signing to turn the company into a ‘foreclosure machine’ while pocketing billions in bailout money. 2) He swindled $50 million out of a media company he ran by resigning two months before the company filed for bankruptcy and using his connections to get preferential payouts. 3) He made $3.2 million in the Bernie Madoff Ponzi scheme, and avoided having to pay back the victims because his army of lawyers convinced a judge that too much time had passed before he got caught. 4) He’s donated more than $120,000 dollars to politicians in both political parties to gain access and influence. This nomination is the clearest evidence yet that Trump conned the working-class voters who supported him.” There’s much more: Yahoo News reported that Mnuchin once foreclosed on a 90 year old woman over a 27 cent payment error. And his bank, One West, foreclosed on no less than 36,000 homes “using tactics a federal judge called ‘harsh, repugnant, shocking, and repulsive.’” (Kurt Walters, Demand Progress, December 30, 2016) Finally, Mnuchin has stated that he will be making every effort to eliminate the Dodd-Frank reforms that served to reign in Wall Street.
In a January 2017 article, Daily Kos noted: “…on the heels of the housing crash, Mnuchin made a killing by buying California-based housing lender IndyMac, renaming it OneWest Bank, and going into the wholesale foreclosure business.” (Mark Sumner, Daily Kos, January 4, 2017) Even more tellingly, the article notes: “OneWest rushed delinquent homeowners out of their homes by violating notice and waiting period statutes, illegally backdated key documents, and effectively gamed foreclosure auctions. Illegal actions by Mnuchin’s bank were so common, that when just one small section of his loans were examined by the California’s State Attorney General’s office, over a thousand legal violations were found. And when confronted by federal regulators, OneWest was the only bank that refused to negotiate.” In other words, Trump has appointed a man who should be on trial for criminal fraud and other financial violations to be his Secretary of the Treasury. Can any thinking American be comfortable with this? The article also notes: “California uses a foreclosure process that’s not overseen by a judge. It counts on all sides in the matter to follow a strict set of rules. But Mnuchin and OneWest didn’t just bend those rules, they regularly broke them to force homeowners onto the street. The consistent violations of California foreclosure processes outlined in the memo would indicate that Mnuchin’s bank didn’t merely act callously, but did so with blatant disregard for the law. According to the memo, OneWest also obstructed the investigation by ordering third parties to refuse to comply with state subpoenas.” Given this it is singularly amazing that Kamala Harris, California’s State Attorney General at the time, failed to indict and prosecute OneWest. Even though the Attorney General’s Consumer Law Section provided Harris with enough information to file a civil enforcement against the bank, Harris refused to take any action. And Kamala Harris, now a California senator, is a Democrat! Having noted this, it must be mentioned that, since her election to the Senate, Harris has gained some backbone, emerging as one of the Trump administration’s harshest critics.
As for Mnuchin himself, the above article notes that he was a key player in this ridiculous and criminal scenario. He was quick to capitalize on the calamity, making over two billion dollars by purchasing IndyMac for $1.5 billion and then selling OneWest and all its foreclosed homes for a hefty $3.5 billion.
Bottom line: Donald Trump has appointed a criminally dishonest and undeniably immoral man who should be on trial for criminal fraud and other financial violations, to be his Secretary of the Treasury. Unbelievable. And unforgivable. And, even worse, all too typical.
I have already discussed Trump’s unconstitutional appointment of General James Mattis as Defense Secretary. Trump also appointed another retired General, Michael T. Flynn, as his Security Advisor. Flynn was forced to resign after 24 days due to the scandal over his connections with Russia; after his firing, the Los Angeles Times reported that: “Former national security advisor Michael Flynn was paid more than $67,000 by Russian companies before the presidential election, according to documents released by a Democratic congressman.” (Los Angeles Times, Associated Press, March 18, 2017) . Prior to his appointment, Flynn met with the leader of the Austrian Freedom Party who had just signed a cooperation agreement with Russia. The Freedom Party dates from the 1950s, when it was founded by a group of ex Nazis. The party has quite a lot of clout, and in a recent election, their candidate, Norbert Hofer, said that he might use an obscure presidential prerogative to dismiss the federal government. Had he won the election, there is little doubt his government would have lifted the sanctions Austria had imposed on Russia for its seizure of Crimea in 2014. Flynn, Putin, and no doubt Trump would approve such action—one of many examples of Trump’s buddy-buddy relationship with the Russian dictator.
Obviously, as typical with virtually every one of Trump’s designated appointees, Flynn had no problem contradicting himself. For example, when interviewed by ABC News on July 10, 2016, Flynn was asked his opinion on abortion, responded by saying: “women have to be able to choose.” The following day, interviewed on right-wing Fox News, he called himself a “pro-life Democrat.” With Democrats like him, who needs Republicans?
Flynn’s resignation in light of the revelations of his secret collusions with the Russian ambassador came as no surprise; The Russian scandal was already of such monumental proportions that it could by itself destroy the Trump administration; even if Trump and Pence weren’t directly involved in Flynn’s actions, they both were well aware of what he had done more than a month prior to his resignation. And they still lied to the American people about it!
Dr. Tom Price heads the Department of Health and Human Services. What does the HHS actually do? In the past, directors have focused on improving health care and lowering costs for the poor and indigent. Price, as a typical Trump cabinet appointee, is working to change all that; his record shows that his real concerns are for physician caregivers’ economic well-being rather than the sick, the poor and the overall health of the public. He is against treating tobacco as a drug. He fought expanding the Child Health Insurance Program. Inexplicably for a physician, he has been outspokenly against Joe Biden’s “Cancer Moonshot” program, designed to speed up progress in cancer prevention and treatment. This program has received enthusiastic support from health organizations, caregivers, cancer researchers, nurses, patients, and just about everyone else—except Tom Price. Could his opposition be due to the simple fact that the program was created by a Democrat?
It may surprise many Americans to know that Price’s nomination was endorsed by the American Medical Association, but that organization has always been composed of Republican-oriented physicians who put their financial interests at center stage. As noted in the Daily Kos: “Tom Price wants to ‘reform’ Medicare by allowing ‘balance billing’ of Medicare-eligible patients by doctors without requiring them to exit the Medicare program entirely, the practical effect of which, as Ryan Cooper, writing for The Week explains, would ‘[allow] doctors and hospitals to devour the nest eggs of thousands of American seniors.’” (Dartagnan, Daily Kos, December 28, 2016) For sure, Price’s appointment will try to destroy Medicare, at least in its current form. Price’s so-called “balanced billing” will drive many seniors into bankruptcy. Is this reform—or destruction? In addition to all this, Price is on record as being a cosponsor of the so-called “First Amendment Defense Act” (FADA) which, despite its innocuous sounding name, would: “Allow businesses, private individuals, and even taxpayer-funded social service providers and government employees to ignore any laws that conflict with a ‘religious belief or moral conviction that marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman’ or that sex outside of such a marriage is sinful.” (Rokia Hassanein, Church and State, January 2017) In other words, Price feels that it’s perfectly all right to discriminate against anyone you disagree with, if this person’s views or actions are against your religious beliefs. Not only is this unconstitutional, it is clearly against the will of the majority of Americans.
CNN broadcast Price as he responded to a question from Brian Kline, a cancer patient who is unable by himself to afford the expensive treatments his treatments require and who depends on Medicaid expansion. Kline asks Price: “So my question for you Secretary Price is pretty straightforward—why do you want to take away my Medicaid expansion?” Price then begins a series of lies and evasions that don’t answer the question at all. First, he said that as a doctor, he “took care of a lot of patients with cancer.” But Price is an orthopedic surgeon, so how could he be involved with cancer patients? Lie number one. Then, he tells Kline: “We don’t want to take care away from anybody. What we want to make certain, though, is that every single American has access to the kind of coverage and care that they want for themselves.” This is technically correct because doctors are required to treat everyone. What Price avoids is the fact that most people cannot afford to get the best treatment, which is at the heart of the issue. Lie number two. Next, he predictably attacks Medicaid, which Kline just finished telling him had saved his life. He said: “You look at the Medicaid program right now, we have one-third of the physicians in this nation, Brian, who are not seeing Medicaid patients. […] Let me just suggest it’s because the Medicaid program itself has real problems in it.” He conveniently overlooks that Kline was able to get treatment on Medicaid, treatment that saved his life. Kline is telling Price that Medicaid saved his life and Price’s answer is that the system is broken. Lie number three. Finally, Price completely overlooked the estimated $880 billion that Trumpcare would have taken from Medicaid, an action that is totally indefensible, which is why he ignored it!
Price, were he an honest man, would have told Kline directly that, because of the administration’s plans to gut Medicaid, the funds will not be there for him in the future. These plans came to fruition by May 2017: Six hundred billion dollars were cut from Medicaid in Trump’s budget. Trump promised during his campaign that he would make no cuts to Medicaid. Lie number four, the worst of the bunch. What does this say about his and Price’s honesty?
Price has come up with the outrageously named “Empowering Patients First” act, whose end results would have exactly the opposite effect: “Price’s plan is regressive: it offers much greater subsidies relative to income for purchasers with high incomes and much more meager subsidies for those with low incomes.
In short, his plan will make it easier for well-off and healthy families to afford care while penalizing the poor and the sick. It would also deregulate the insurance business, allowing a race to bottom in terms of coverage and an increase in cost sharing. Insurance companies will see a windfall under his plan.” (Adenovir, Daily Kos, December 23, 2016) The article notes that, under Price’s plan, physicians will be: “Empowered to negotiate higher rates with insurers, increasing their income at the expense of patients, since these costs will be passed on directly to them. Patients will receive less care for more money and those with pre-existing conditions will probably not be able to afford care unless they are wealthy.” All this is part of Trump’s great scheme to “improve” health care in America. As with other departments, it seems obvious that Trump and Price’s real intention is to destroy the HHS.
Price also supports the discredited idea known as “conversion therapy,” a practice that, so adherents claim, can “cure” people of their homosexuality. Part of his platform in 2000 when he was running for Congress was a proposal that would have diverted HIV-prevention money to this ridiculous idea, one that has been rejected and even condemned by mental health professionals. Not to worry: Rest assured that Price and the administration will be able to come up with plenty of “alternative facts” in favor of conversion therapy.
One by one, Trump’s appointees begin to look like the worst possible choices he could have made for their respective positions. Ben Carson, who ran against him for the Republican nomination and was called a “loser” by Trump during that campaign (for once, Trump was right!), has been named to head the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), even though he detests the various safety net programs and fair housing legislation that have long been the focal point of that agency’s agenda, insisting that individual effort, rather than governmental assistance, is the best way to overcome poverty. While this is undoubtedly true, Carson goes much too far with it, using it as an excuse to discriminate against the most needy Americans. And, like so many of Trump’s appointees, Carson has no experience whatever in housing policy.
Some of Carson’s comments and opinions would be much funnier if he possessed no political power. His infamous 1998 statement that he thought Joseph of the Old Testament was the man who built the Egyptian pyramids in order to store grain is hilariously inaccurate. His views of science are even more ridiculous than his understanding of history. Like almost all Republicans, he is notoriously anti-science, claiming that evolution is false and the work of the devil. He is also on record as claiming that homosexuality is a choice and that: “Obamacare is: “the worst thing that has happened in this nation since slavery.” Although these comments have nothing to do with HUD, they do show that this man is factually challenged, to put it mildly.
Trump named Betsy DeVos to head the U.S. Department of Education. She was not his first choice. That “honor” went to Jerry Falwell Jr., president of Liberty University and yet another Christian fundamentalist seeking to destroy public education. Although he refused the post, Falwell has indicated that he might be “willing to serve in some capacity.” Trump’s subsequent decision to nominate DeVos shows us that, once again, we see someone being tapped to a top governmental position who has no experience in the area she is to oversee and who, more to the point, seems intent on destroying the agency she is supposed to be leading. DeVos is not an educator, nor does she possess any kind of qualifications for the post. Given DeVos’ outspoken criticism of the public school system and her advocacy of taxpayer-supported school vouchers which the majority of Americans do not favor, we see yet another example of the foxes guarding the chicken coop. As The Washington Post noted in quoting Stephen Henderson of The Detroit Free Press: “For 20 years, the lobby her family bankrolls has propped up the billion-dollar charter school industry and insulated it from commonsense oversight, even as charter schools repeatedly failed to deliver on their promises to parents and children.” (Valerie Strauss, The Washington Post, December 8, 2016) But DeVos’ intentions are even worse than this suggests: She and her family have been staunch advocates for the funding of private religious schools over public ones. In this, she shows herself to be yet another lackey of the Radical Religious Right (RRR) and their fundamentalist agenda; the DeVos family is a mover and shaker of the modern Republican party and extremely influential in pushing it further to the right of the political spectrum. They have spent countless amounts of money and effort on so-called “right to work” laws, which requires every employee belonging to a union to pay dues for union representation. This bill became law in Michigan in 2012 and is now on the books in 26 states. Not surprisingly, these laws have hurt the labor movement tremendously, which was the obvious intention of labor-hating conservatives.
Teachers unions have been among the hardest hit; to cite one example, teachers in Michigan are no longer allowed to strike—yet another illustration of the fascistic nature of most Republican-inspired legislation. Mother Jones magazine noted that: “About 80 percent of state charter schools are run by for-profit management companies, a much higher share than anywhere else in the country, and with very little oversight from the state. And this year, the DeVoses were the biggest financial backers of the effort to oppose any new state oversight of charters.” (Kristina Rizga, Mother Jones, November 29, 2016) No oversight, and beholden to corporate and religious interests—that is the school system envisioned by Betsy DeVos. And rest assured she will make every attempt to make it the new status quo for all American schoolchildren.
The DeVos’s are even more fanatical when it comes to the issue of school vouchers, and have been eminently successful in making them a cornerstone of the Republican Party’s agenda. As a result, as of early 2017, thirteen states now have active voucher programs, and DeVos serves on the board of the American Federation for Children which, despite its seemingly benign name, has long been at the forefront of the voucher programs. The results in those areas that have adopted the programs have been mixed at best, and unmitigated disasters at their worst. Mother Jones quoted Douglas Harris, an economist and director of the Education Research Alliance in New Orleans as follows: “Students who participated in [Louisiana’s] voucher program had declines in achievement tests scores of eight to 16 percentile points. In Ohio, the results were also negative (though less so).” (Kristina Rizga, Mother Jones, November 29, 2016) But for the DeVos family, facts must never get in the way of ideology, for nothing will dissuade them (or their Republican counterparts) from their faith. Under Trump and DeVos, the federal government may well steer Title 1 funding, which funds low-income public schools, to high-income private religious schools.
Church and State made some salient points about vouchers: “To date, there is only one federally funded school voucher program: the Opportunity Scholarship Program that uses $20 million annually to fund vouchers for about 1,200 students in Washington, D.C. Despite studies showing the program is not improving education and opposition from the majority of the members on D.C.’s council a House committee in March agreed to forward a bill to reauthorize the program for another five years to the House floor for a vote…The committee declined to include amendments to the bill that would have strengthened the program’s evaluation process, required participating private schools to adhere to civil rights protections for students with disabilities and protected LGBTQ students from discrimination.” (Liz Hayes, Church and State, May, 2013) The article shows that actually educating students is the farthest thing from the minds of voucher advocates; that and affording voucher students the same rights and privileges public schools receive. Neither are they concerned about the will of the American people who, in poll after poll, have shown their disapproval of vouchers. Clearly, Betsy DeVos and her right-wing cohorts are on the wrong side of this issue.
Even though Al Franken, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders and others during the Senate confirmation hearings totally exposed how completely clueless she is with regard to education, every Republican voted to approve her appointment. What a surprise!
During these hearings, DeVos proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that she isn’t even remotely qualified for the post. She showed that she is completely clueless about even the most basic education issues. She refused to answer important questions. When questioned by Franken, DeVos showed that she doesn’t know the difference between growth assessments and proficiency, which is something every teacher and educator is familiar with. She hadn’t heard of the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. She even suggested that a Wyoming public school might do well to have guns on campus. Why? Because, she noted, they might need protection against grizzly bears. Again, this would be laughable if the situation weren’t so dangerous. I defy anyone to read or listen to the proceedings and conclude that she is qualified to lead the Department of Education. But her approval proved once again that today’s Republicans aren’t the least bit interested either in qualifications or honesty. Ideology trumps the facts. They clearly have no idea how important education is to this country; their goal is to destroy public education altogether and turn it over to the churches in their hope to brainwash students with mindless religious dogma and create a new generation of unquestioning believers. DeVos has proven this with her own words, when she said that school vouchers are a way to “advance God’s kingdom.” Then, she turns around and defends schools that discriminate against students! Apparently, in her warped mind, “God’s kingdom” is one composed exclusively of bigots.
Not surprisingly, once she was approved, she and Trump began working together to destroy public education. As Heidi Heitcamp reports: “The Washington Post reports that President Trump and Betsy DeVos are proposing a $10.6 billion cut to education.” (Heidi Heitcamp, D—ND) Has any previous Secretary of Education gone out of their way to destroy the cabinet they were appointed to protect?
Betsy DeVos has shown her true colors since she assumed the post. Even though most would agree that education is a key component of our democratic system, DeVos obviously disagrees. She is doing her utmost to eliminate civil rights protection for students. She asked men’s rights groups for advice on how to deal with sexual assault cases. It is obvious that her priorities are not with students.
Trump’s choice for Secretary of State should surprise no one, considering the gallery of rogues already mentioned. Exxon CEO Rex Tillerson joined with Cathy McMorris Rodgers and Scott Pruitt in a concerted effort to destroy all obstacles to Big Oil. Once again, Trump has appointed someone to a top position who has no governmental experience whatever. Tillerson possesses enormous power and influence, and has made every effort to ease sanctions against Russia, thus assisting Exxon’s oil extraction there; as he has been an Exxon employee for over forty years, his actions here should come as no surprise. This, coupled with the fact he has been friends with Vladimir Putin for many years, bodes ill for the environment. According the Los Angeles Times: “Putin bestowed Russia’s Order of Friendship on Tillerson in 2013, two years after Exon Mobil signed a multi-billion-dollar deal with Russia’s largest state-owned oil company, Rosneft, for joint exploration and production.” (Tracy Wilkinson, Los Angeles Times, December 11, 2016) The article also noted: “When Russian forces invaded Ukraine and seized the Crimean peninsula in 2014, Tillerson lobbied against U.S. sanctions because Exxon would lose millions of dollars.” And: “The oil industry is seen by critics as a rapacious business that has propped up dictators and run roughshod over environmental concerns and indigenous groups in countries around the world.” Tillerson’s appointment alone was proof of Trump’s hostility toward environmental concerns, which has been magnified many times over during his first months as president.
Like most Republicans, Tillerson seems to be more than willing to look the other way as far as dictatorships go, as long as said dictatorship is in alignment with his views. Tillerson has major ties to Russian businesses, but Russia is just one of many examples. Another concerns the repressive dictatorship in Equatorial Guinea; Exxon has worked with and cut deals with the government there, despite its documented human rights violations. This corrupt government ignores elections and freely engages in torture of dissidents. ExxonMobil knows about climate science, yet has spent enormous amounts of money on spokespersons who ignore the facts and paint a rosy picture of its business dealings—after all, the truth would hurt its profits. The company was also responsible for the Exxon Valdez oil spill, which proved to be one of the worst environmental disasters in history. To be sure, Exxon’s dealings with Equatorial Guinea are most consistent with its history of supporting any means necessary against individuals and communities who have the temerity to raise their voices against their operations.
ExxonMobile was sued by Environment America for violating the Clean Air act. The court ruled against ExxonMobile, and ordered them to pay nearly twenty million dollars for violating the Act no less than 16,386 times. The Houston Chronicle, reporting the decision, noted: “In a 101-page decision, Hittner (the judge in the case) accepted the plaintiffs’ argument that Exxon collected more than $14 million in so-called economic benefits by delaying actions that would have curbed the emissions, such as improving plant automation and enhancing emissions monitoring with infrared imaging technology.” (Collin Eaton, Houston Chronicle, April 26, 2017) The plant in question, located in Baytown, Texas, had toxic emissions that resulted in complaints from people living nearby, who reported noxious smells, bad air quality, and the growing fear that each flaring event might result in a potentially lethal explosion. The fine was the largest penalty from an environmental citizen suit in United States history. However, given the Trump administrations goal of stacking the courts with Republican ideologues, future rulings may well side with the polluters—no matter what the evidence is to the contrary or how grave the pollution actually is.
Environment America closes the above article by noting: “Now, Exxon has announced it will appeal the judge’s decision — even though its own reports revealed the Baytown refinery had pumped out more than 10 million pounds of illegal pollution.”
Trump’s administration has already repeatedly shown that it has no qualms whatever in cozying up to dictatorships. To cite another example, RootsAction DIY asked its readers the following: “We strongly urge you to block the Trump Administration’s recently-announced weapons sale to the Government of Bahrain. This weapons sale reportedly has no human rights conditions attached to it. A release of weapons to the Bahraini government would send a green light to authorities that they will receive little-to-no pushback against their violent, repressive policies that further serve to destabilize the country. The Department of State in its recent 2016 human rights report found a number of systematic human rights violations perpetrated by the Bahraini government, including excessive use of force against protesters and imprisoning human rights defenders. Bahraini authorities must prove that they will not continue systematically committing human rights violations against the country’s civilian population. U.S. weapons sales to foreign countries—if they should happen at all — should always include human rights conditions to help ensure stability and peace abroad. In January 2017, we heard a surprise announcement of the release of a previously-blocked multi-million dollar fighter jet package for the Government of Bahrain with no human rights conditions. The U.S. government had previously blocked the sale in 2016 due to concerns that the Bahraini government systematically violated the human rights of civilians. At the start of a new U.S. Administration under President Trump, the announcement of the sale is extremely worrying. Since the Arab Spring protests of 2011, the Government of Bahrain has continued violently suppressing peaceful dissent in the kingdom and blatantly ignoring international calls for human rights reform. Just this year in January 2017, the Bahraini authorities launched a campaign of unprecedented force against the civilian population.” (RootsAction DIY, March 15, 2017)
Getting back to Rex Tillerson, we note that he is in a position to challenge the United States’ climate deals such as the Paris accords. Once again, the mainstream media has failed to live up to its responsibilities concerning Tillerson; in direct defiance of American policy, Tillerson in 2011 cut an independent deal with the Kurdish Regional Government that hurt our national interests. Despite his actions, which could well be considered traitorous, he brushed off concerns by saying: “I had to do what was best for my shareholders.” Never mind that he is putting the interests of Big Oil over the interest of his own country. (Michael Brune, Sierra Club, December 13, 2016) The man who defied the State Department has now been appointed to be its head. Will the man whose personal and professional duties conflict with those of his country suddenly put his country first? Anyone who thinks he will is in serious need of a reality check.
Sid Miller, the anti-EPA Texas Ag Commissioner who is known for, among other things, spreading false news stories on Facebook, was thought to be Trump’s original choice for Agriculture Secretary. Miller is another right-winger whose name should be permanently linked with scandal. His crudeness resembles that of Trump himself; during the election, he called Hillary Clinton the c-word on Twitter, and of course later denied it, saying a staff member was responsible. Politico reported that: “That came months after Miller was investigated for allegedly using taxpayer money and campaign funds to fly to Oklahoma for a so-called Jesus Shot, a legal but controversial cocktail of drugs and vitamins that, it is claimed, cures pain for life. Miller has also compared Syrian refugees to rattlesnakes on his Facebook page and made moves to bring full-calorie sodas and deep fryers back to Texas schools. (Ian Kulgren, Politico, December 28, 2016)
Trump’s ultimate selection for the post of Secretary of Agriculture was Sonny Perdue, another (surprise!) climate change denier. As governor of Georgia, the Georgia State Ethics Commission received thirteen complaints against Perdue. The Commission ruled against him twice once it was revealed that Perdue had received improper campaign donations from donors including SunTrust Banks. His conflicts of interest, while minor compared with those of Trump, are nonetheless indicative of a fundamental dishonesty: Perdue, unlike his predecessors as governor, refused to put his assets in a blind trust once he was elected. Despite the fact that he signed an executive order prohibiting himself and all other state employees from receiving any gift worth more than $25, Perdue, as governor, accepted more than $25,000 in various gifts. And, despite his ownership of 101 acres of land near his home, Perdue failed to reveal this in the required financial disclosure forms. Despite his obvious corruption and dishonesty, Perdue was affirmed by the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry by a 19 to 1 margin. And, as with all the other Trump appointees, Perdue was given a virtual free ride by the press, the overwhelming majority of which utterly failed to report any of this to its readers.
There are numerous common threads to all of this. One of these concerns fundamentalist religion. Since it disproves their religious fantasies, Republican leaders are notoriously hostile to science, and this hostility is by no means limited to their hatred of evolution, stem cell research, and climate change. Climate change is currently at the forefront of national attention, but Republican’s denial of this universally accepted truism is simple to explain: the oil companies ridicule and denigrate climate change simply because it threatens their profits; they have huge financial stakes in fossil fuels. No Republican leader in this administration has provided any credible proof that climate change is not real; they just deny it and assume that this in itself constitutes proof. This illustrates one of the key factors which helps to explain why so many Republicans are hostile towards science and scientific research, namely that the ever-increasing denial of science is due to various well-funded campaigns conducted to sow doubt in the general public about the verities of science. This is done any time science is seen to conflict with the interests of the rich and powerful.
The Republican mindset on philosophy is also fairly easy to dissect: Since philosophy has destroyed all the rationalizations for the existence of gods, philosophy must go, to be replaced by theology. Their various statements and political stances clearly show that Republicans want to drag the entire human race back to the imagined halcyon days of centuries ago when religion reigned supreme and those daring to question its tenets faced the wrath of church/state union. Moreover, since they perceive science as being anti-big business, science must go. Consider this: Mick Mulvaney, Trump’s choice as director for the Office of Management and Budget, has publicly stated that the federal government shouldn’t be spending any money at all on scientific research. The Daily Kos noted that: “The man who would have his finger on the figures for the nation’s research budgets justified the attack on basic science by questioning the connection between the Zika virus and birth defects.” (Mark Sumner, Daily Kos, December 19, 2016) It goes without saying that Mulvaney is a climate change denier. His views are so ridiculous that the Union of Concerned Scientists “felt strongly enough to issue a statement condemning Mulvaney’s stance on science.” (Phil Plait, Bad Astronomy, December 20, 2016) The Trump administration’s position is petulant, dangerous, and crystal clear: Since science can’t prove what we want to believe is true, we’ll teach them a lesson and stop giving them any money.
A look at Mulvaney’s record as Congressman from South Carolina’s fifth congressional district should frighten anyone except the reality deniers who voted Trump in. A November 11, 2016 web article entitled A Citizen’s Look at Mick Mulvaney expresses considerable alarm at his track record, for numerous reasons: “Those reasons include his inability to get along well with his colleagues, his disdain for working with his opposition, his lack of respect for the needs of women, his cozy relationship with lobbyists and special interests, his office-hopping ambition, his failure to accomplish anything substantive, his evident hypocrisy, and his failure to adhere to his stated principles.” He goes on to discuss Mulvaney’s dishonesty: “He helped himself to the use of public funds to support his private real estate projects in Lancaster County, but opposes using public financing to help South Carolina’s young people attend college, South Carolina businesspeople expand their business, and South Carolina families get their first home. He has fought for corporate interests, the same ones that fund his campaigns, without regard for their impact on the people he represents.” Add to this the fact that he failed to bring any jobs to the district he represents and seems not to care a whit for his constituents, and you have a fairly typical contemporary Republican politician.
Trump seriously considered fracking billionaire Harold Hamm to be his Energy Secretary before deciding on Rick Perry. Perry, a candidate for president in 2012, is an extremely conservative Christian fundamentalist who famously forgot the name of the Energy Department during his campaign. In other words, Perry is head of the company he promised to destroy but whose name he couldn’t even remember! Perry is yet another ignoramus denying climate change; like everyone else in Trump’s cabinet, we may rest assured that Rick Perry will continue to promote the interests of Big Oil over those of the American people. President Obama chose scientists to be his Energy Secretaries. One, Stephen Chu, was asked if his scientific background helped him make better decisions, he said: “All the time.” Contrast this with Rick Perry, whose education consists of a Bachelor’s degree in Animal Science. While at Texas A&M, he received “D”s in many of his classes. Obviously, choosing a qualified individual to serve as Energy Secretary was not a consideration for Trump. Anyone who has read up to this point should understand why.
For Secretary of Labor, Trump initially chose Andy Puzder, a fanatical anti-abortionist and misogynist who once said: “I like beautiful women eating burgers in bikinis. I think it’s very American,” to defend a sexist advertising campaign. (Sasha Bruce, Naral, Pro-Choice America, December 21, 2016) The same article noted that: “His ex-wife once sought a protective order after she alleged that he attacked her—choking her, throwing her to the ground and preventing her from calling the police.” It will come as no surprise at this point to note that Puzder seems virulently anti-worker, claiming that they are “over-protected” and should get no breaks. RawStory examined his record with his own company and noted: “The Department of Labor came into his restaurants and found that half his restaurants had wage and labor violations that violated the law of the United States.’” (Erin Corbett, RawStory, December 28, 2016) For once, there was enough opposition to keep Puzder from assuming the post. Trump therefore nominated Alexander Acosta to the post, one of the few nominees seemingly less controversial.
Trump’s choice as Secretary of the Interior is Ryan Zinke, who made much noise about how much he loves the outdoors. Then, on his first day on the job, he signed an order that eliminates protections for wildlife and the environment. Sierra Rise provides all the gory details: “The policy Zinke reversed would have phased out toxic ammunition and fishing tackle from national wildlife refuges by 2022. The purpose of this common-sense safeguard was to reduce lead, a powerful neurotoxin that persists in water and soil for a long time. Birds are especially vulnerable to lead poisoning. Ducks and waterfowl rooting around the bottom of wetlands accidentally eat discarded lead. Birds of prey eat animal carcasses that contain lead bullet fragments—making lead poisoning a huge threat for iconic species like bald eagles and California condors. While other government agencies are moving forward with policies to limit lead exposure, the Interior Department is going backward. It’s especially frustrating since nontoxic alternatives already exist for hunters and anglers.” (Sierra Rise, March 20, 2017)
Trump’s choice for head of the SEC, the man selected to be the “policeman of Wall Street” is Jay Clayton. This appointment is so laughingly ridiculous that it is hard to believe anyone could report it with a straight face. As Rootstrikers noted: “Jay Clayton is of, by, and for the biggest banks on Wall Street, someone the New York Times calls an ‘insider’s insider.’” He has dedicated his career as a lawyer to help bankers who have broken the law get off the hook. During the economic collapse during Bush’s presidency in 2008, Clayton, at the time working s Goldman Sachs’s bailout lawyer, helped his bank secure ten billion dollars in federal bailout funds. Meanwhile, millions of Americans were being served with foreclosure notices. Since then, other clients of Clayton have been charged with breaking SEC rules. Clayton was working with Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns, the two banks that failed, beginning the economic meltdown and huge bailout for banks. What is so ironic about Trump’s selection is that his campaign was said to be focused on exposing financial corruption; one TV ad showed Goldman Sachs’s CEO as Trump was talking about “failed and corrupt political establishment.” If Trump wanted to “drain the swamp” as he repeatedly said, shouldn’t he have started here? As head of the SEC, Clayton would have to recuse himself from any actions taken against the banks and companies he is involved with. And, like so many other dishonest Trump appointees, Clayton tried to hide his connections to his law firm (Sullivan and Cromwell) once he was nominated for head of the SEC.
Sean Spicer was Trump’s Press Secretary until his resignation on July 21, 2017, and he proved himself, like all the others, to be spectacularly unfit for his position. Like his boss, he is an unmitigated liar; his lie about inauguration attendance was merely the first of many “alternative facts” that have flowed from the oval office like pus from a gaping wound. Within days of Trump’s inauguration, Spicer was accusing the media of “sowing division.” In other words, the media is daring to question Trump’s lies. Spicer’s most outrageous statement was when, in defiance of all known history, he said that Hitler did not use poison gas during the Holocaust. Is this statement merely a reflection of somebody woefully ignorant of history, or does it provide us with yet another example of an administration lackey who views fascism in a favorable light? Or perhaps both?
Spicer is fairly typical of Trump’s cronies, who seem to reveal their ignorance, bigotry, and hatred every time they open their mouths. There was one bizarre moment, comical at the time, and ludicrous in retrospect, that occurred on May 31, 2017. Trump tweeted: “Despite the constant negative press covfefe.” There was nothing else in the tweet, and people understandably wondered what he meant. Did he just misspell something? Spicer, during a subsequent eleven minute briefing, did not clarify anything but, in typical fashion, brushed it aside by saying: “The president and a small group of people know exactly what he meant.” Spicer predictably refused to enlighten the rest of us on just what the word meant, and ignored all the press questions on the issue. He will officially leave in August.
Two months into his administration, Trump announced he would nominate Mark Green, a senator from Tennessee, to be the new Army Secretary of the United States. This man is fanatically opposed to LGBTQ rights. He has also made it a core component of his political career to encourage bigotry based on religious ideology. He was quoted in 2016 as saying that being transgender “is a disease.” He also tows the party line with regard to gun laws, going so far as to say that everyone should be entitled to carry guns without having to obtain a permit. According to the Credo Action: “He also believes that mental health practitioners should have the freedom to withhold treatment from LGBTQ people seeking help and physicians should have the right to withhold contraceptives and the morning-after-pill from women.” (Credo Action, April 17, 2017)
I’ve saved the worst for last. Trump chose Mike Pence as his vice-president, a Christian fundamentalist who puts his bible ahead of the Constitution. This man, besides single-handedly destroying the economy of Indiana when he was governor, threatens to, if he gets his way, set the country back over half a century in terms of a woman’s right to choose, racial concerns, and various other social issues. As governor, he supported some of the most repressive legislation seen in the entire country. For example, he signed some of the most restrictive abortion regulations ever seen in the United States. Abortion, under this law, would have been banned no matter what the circumstances. For example, if the fetus exhibited signs of Down’s Syndrome, the mother would nonetheless have to carry it to term. Fortunately, a Supreme Court decision in June, 2016 rendered the law null and void. And of course, Pence was and is virulently against Planned Parenthood and has gone out of his way to ensure that funding for that organization was halted. None of the Republicans who want to destroy Planned Parenthood seem the least concerned that doing so would cost the lives of around 900,000 women. The end result of Pence’s action was that many clinics were forced to close in his state and that an H.I.V. epidemic broke out in one Indiana county. But this is irrelevant to men such as Pence: a chunk of aborted fetus is more precious to them than the well-being of real, living people. And of course, after he became Vice President, the White House actually had the gall to claim that he showed “strong and compassionate leadership” in fighting the epidemic. This is yet another example of a major lie emanating from the White House. The reality, as discussed by LeftAction, was that: “In reality, Pence tried to strip critical funding for HIV prevention programs and re-allocate funding to cruel anti-LGBT hate groups that promote conversion therapy. His efforts directly put thousands of lives at risk. Only after extreme public outrage to the growing HIV epidemic in Indiana, did Pence finally cave.” (LeftAction, April 22, 2017) While Mike Pence was governor, gay couples applying for marriage faced 18 months in prison. Equality Pac listed some of his other actions while governor: “From passing Indiana’s horrific anti-LGBT ‘religious liberty’ bill, to leading the charge against Marriage Equality, to supporting electroshock therapy for LGBT children, to igniting a regional HIV epidemic by defunding LGBT-friendly health clinics, Pence has again and again worked to discriminate against and harm the LGBT community.” (Equality Pac, April 23, 2017) No wonder that Rachel Maddow called him “the most vociferously anti-gay official in the country.”
Pence and his chief are determined to destroy Planned Parenthood. On April 13, 2017, Trump signed legislation to end all federal funding for Planned Parenthood, as well as other groups that provide abortions. He signed this legislation on the same day that he ordered the bombing of another country and, tellingly, as the Russia/Trump scandal moved closer and closer toward him personally. While he has proven that he knows nothing about politics, he is proving himself to be a master distracter.
The Vice President has also bought into the latest GOP strategy concerning religion: hijacking the words “freedom” and “liberty” to enable fundamentalist Christians to refuse services and discriminate against anyone that doesn’t conform to their narrow views of Christianity. These terms have been misused for decades. The outrageously named “Religious Freedom Restoration Act” was a case in point. This act, passed in 1993, has been used as a vehicle to allow employers and business owners to discriminate against anyone they don’t like, all under the guise of “religious freedom.” Pence avidly supports this aspect of religious intolerance and bigotry, which will be examined in detail in a moment. Pence is also against gays serving in the military. And, consistent with Christian fundamentalism, Pence has fought against funding that supports treatment for those suffering from H.I.V. and AIDS, unless the government also put funds toward programs that discouraged people from gay and lesbian relationships. Along the same line, Pence has tried to divert federal money away from the AIDS groups that need it toward “conversion therapy,” that nonsensical idea that people can be “cured” of their homosexuality by turning themselves over to god and Jesus. Finally, Pence has opposed changing any law that classifies violence against the LGBT community as hate crimes. In other words, gay-bashing is OK by Pence. The immorality of fundamentalist religious morality is breathtakingly obvious to anyone with any real ethical scruples.
Mike Pence’s role in Trump’s administration has already proven to be huge. Trump made it clear at the outset of his campaign that Pence would be in charge of foreign and domestic affairs. This makes him, as the Daily Kos noted, the: “de facto leader of the Republican party, which is no longer the party of conservatism, but is now the party of nationalism; but more importantly Mike Pence is at the head of another, far more dangerous Republican group, the ‘Christian Supremacists,’ who are committed to taking over the government of the United States of America.” (ursulafaw, Daily Kos, January 2, 2017)
The Daily Kos article also notes that Pence’s all-time hero is Christian fundamentalist James Dobson, and when Dobson invited him to be on his radio show, Pence said this was “the greatest honor of my entire life.” Both men are of the same stripe, particularly in their shared hatred of the LGBT community. Dobson founded both Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council, two organizations with seemingly harmless names whose main focus is to dispense anti-gay doctrines cloaked in religious garb. Dobson has gone so far as to say that the horrific massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012 was the result of same-sex marriage and that gay marriage could result in another civil war. Rest assured that if such a war actually takes place, it will be instigated by religious hate mongers such as Dobson, Pence, and their minions.
Interestingly, despite their constant flag-waving and their claim to be ultra-patriotic, Christians like Pence’s real loyalty is not to the American people but rather to their version of religion and their determination to force it on everyone else. Force is the key word here, since most Americans are not Christian fundamentalists but much more open about religious diversity. This is viewed by the fundamentalists as a threat. During his speech at the Republican Convention, Pence stated that he was “a Christian first, a conservative second, and a Republican third.” No mention at all of whether or not he considered himself an American! This statement alone should have disqualified him from holding public office: Anyone who puts his religious beliefs before the well-being of the country clearly is not representing everyone in the country and cannot be trusted to enforce its laws.
Let the Los Angeles Times have the last word on Donald Trump’s appointees: In a December article entitled “Trump’s picks at odds with his message,” it was noted: “Donald Trump promotes himself as a man divorced from party ideology, a president-elect just as open-minded to input from Al Gore as from Newt Gingrich. But…he has chosen one of the most consistently conservative domestic policy teams in modern history, setting himself up for hard decisions and potential conflicts with some of his supporters when he begins to govern. (Noah Bierman and Evan Halper, Los Angeles Times, December 15, 2016) The article goes on thusly: “Trump campaigned against the big banks, then chose a former Goldman Sachs partner, Steven Mnuchin, to run his Treasury Department. He pledged to save Medicare and Social Security, then chose Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.), who has advocated sweeping revisions in Medicare and Medicaid, to run Health and Human Services. Trump has placed the burdens of working people at the top of his agenda, yet chose as Labor Secretary an executive, Andrew Puzder, who talked in an interview about the advantages of replacing human workers with machines because they are ‘always polite they always upsell, they never take a vacation, they never show up late, there’s never a slip-and-fall, or an age, sex, or race discrimination case.’” Apparently, in Trumpspeak, to “save” something means to destroy it.
NAZIISM AND THE NEW CHRISTIANS
Let us now change course and briefly examine the connection between Hitler’s rise to power and the rise to power of the new Christian nationalists. Are there any similarities?
Thanks to the support of Dietrich Eckhart and his Worker’s Party, Hitler was able to strengthen his position in politics, and the elements in German society that had been labeled as fringe elements then became central to the emerging Nazi party’s ideology. In the same way, today’s Republican ideologues have morphed their former conservatism into the party of Christian nationalism, a party that places white supremacy at the forefront of its agenda. Lest anyone think this to be over-stating the case, consider that, just as in Nazi Germany, white supremacist groups like the KKK, once considered to be on the fringes of society have, since Donald Trump’s victory, suddenly re-emerged, confidently holding rallies and meetings in which Hitler-like demagogues preach a platform based on patriotism, Americanism, nationalism, Christian fundamentalism and an unvarnished hatred of those they consider to be the enemies of the country. And, most tellingly, no one in the Trump administration has voiced any concern at all over this. Why should they, given that there are so many like-minded individuals in the cabinet and other key posts? Exactly in the same way as Hitler focused his hatred of the Jews and how they threatened the well-being of Germany, today’s Christian Nationalists scream their hatred of gays, Democrats, secular humanists, liberals, and anyone else they think threatens them in any way. The connections between Naziism and today’s ultra-conservative Republicans are obvious, though one will search in vain in the mainstream media outlets to find it: the Christian Supremacists, led by fundamentalist evangelicals, see themselves as “God’s chosen ones” to lead this country, bible in hand, toward a new fundamentalist state in which dissent will be stifled, free speech unheard of, and the Constitution either discarded, altered or “re-interpreted” in a way that the founding fathers never intended.
There are too many shared commonalities between Naziism and Christian Nationalism to ignore. Hitler, like today’s Christian fundamentalists, opposed church/state separation; he called it atheism and constantly denounced it. Dr. Tom Price’s advocacy of the discredited notion of “conversion therapy” to ‘cure’ homosexuality bears more than a little resemblance to the inhumane “experiments” performed by Nazi so-called doctors; is it a stretch of the imagination to think that today’s fundamentalist Christian leaders would willingly engage in medical “experiments” to “cure” people of their sexual orientation? Given their outlandish views on this and other topics, it might not be a stretch at all.
The roles of married couples, as outlined in the Bible, are central to today’s Christian Nationalists as they were to their Nazi forbearers. The Nazis preached about the supposedly natural roles of human sexuality and tortured and killed those deemed as deviants. Christian Nationalists have made traditional family and sexual roles central to their political platform. While at present, there is no widespread call for the torture and murder of those who deviate from their definition of what constitutes “acceptable” sexual behavior, this certainly does not mean that such actions cannot take place in the future. Clearly, absolute control of America by today’s Christian Supremacists would not bode well for the future of the LGBT community.
The connection between the Nazis, the KKK, and today’s Republican Nationalists in their targeting of those deviating from traditional marriage and what they consider “acceptable” sexual behavior is obvious. For example, consider the words of Newt Gingrich on the subject: “There is a gay and secular fascism in this country that wants to impose its will on the rest of us…I think it is a very dangerous threat to anybody who believes in traditional religion.” Notice the misuse of the word “fascism” which, as we have seen, applies only to right-wing groups. And exactly where is this “imposition” coming from? Is the LGBT community demanding that everyone engage in homosexual activity? Of course not. All they want is the right to co-habitate and marry a person of the same sex. How is this a threat to Newt Gingrich or anyone else? Again, what this is really all about control: those on the right demand that everyone act exactly as they do, or at least as they say they do. The LGBT community is, in their myopic worldview, the enemy (one of many), if not outright agents of Satan, and they are not about to compromise with Satan (never mind that he doesn’t exist!). So, discrimination against the LGBT community is due to one factor and one factor only: religious fundamentalism. Eliminate that from the equation and you eliminate bigotry against this community, and against anyone else that is the target of right-wing hate groups.
Across the country, Republicans have uttered some of the most cruel and heinous statements against the LGBT community imaginable. For example, when the Matthew Shepherd act to protect the community from hate crimes was introduced during George W. Bush’s administration, Republicans offered harsh resistance, and when it was re-introduced under Obama, Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., had the audacity to refer to Shepherd’s murder as a “hoax.” This was done while Shepherd’s mother was present in the House chamber! Jeff Sessions has added his two cents in the debate by saying that hate crimes are mere “thought” crimes, as if Shepherd was murdered by mere hateful thinking. People like this have no shame and should be ousted from office as soon as it is possible to do so.
This is what happens when one’s religious beliefs supersede both common sense and moral sentiment.
And, even though their beloved Bible says nothing whatsoever about abortion, Christian Nationalism has made this one of their central issues. As the Daily Kos correctly noted in the above article: “The need to control other peoples’ sexual behavior is the most emotional doctrine of the Christian Supremacists and fuels their drive for power.” Now that they have the power, legislation promulgating their views will not be long in coming. Whether the Democrats and the American people have the gumption to stand up to them remains to be seen.
Martin Niemoller’s classic rejoinder about how the Nazis came to power can be re-worded to suit the situation today facing America: “First they came for the Mexicans (‘We are going to build a wall’), and I did not speak out—because I was not Mexican. They they came for the gays, and I did not speak out—because I was not gay. Then they came for the Muslims and I did not speak out— because I am not a Muslim. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not Jewish. Then they came for the blacks, and I did not speak out—because I am not black. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.” Far-fetched? Not in the least, if one takes the time to read what the Republican Nationalists have written and to listen to what they are saying.
CHRISTIAN NATIONALISM
To return to our vice-president, it will be noted that Mike Pence is merely the latest in a long string of fundamentalist proto-fascists who began to emerge into the mainstream of American politics in the late 1970s (and, in some cases, even earlier). Pat Robertson’s infamous 700 Club began to alter some of the few helpful ideas contained in the Bible, even though Robertson himself is a minister of the gospel. For example, rather than appealing to the poor, Robertson and his followers ignore scripture and began to preach that aiding the poor through taxation was somehow immoral, even though the Old Testament preaches that helping the poor is a Christian duty. Robertson was one of the first to preach a new nationalism and an American Empire which disdained pluralism either political or religious, and said on July 19, 1985, that the American people “must speak with one voice.” Famed evangelist Billy Graham appeared on Robertson’s program on April 4, 1985 and announced that he was “for evangelicals…getting control of the Congress, getting control of the bureaucracy, getting control of the executive branch of government. If we leave it to the other side we’re going to be lost.” Not to be outdone, fundamentalist preacher and author Tim LaHaye on September 25, 1985, laid out the plan how all this could be done. He said: “Suppose that every Bible believing church—all 110,000—decided to…raise up one person to run for public office and win… If every church in the next ten years did that, we would have more Christians in office than there are positions…there are only 97,000 elective offices.” While this might have seemed totally unrealistic in 1985, the three decades since have clearly demonstrated quite the opposite.
In fact, Trump is already taking action on this. Rootstrikers notes that: “Trump signed a ‘religious liberty’ executive order granting broad exemptions to churches and other religious institutions from tax and political spending laws. The order directs the IRS to use ‘maximum discretion’ when enforcing the Johnson Amendment, which forbids religious groups and other charitable organizations from endorsing or working for particular candidates. ‘Maximum discretion’ is a fancy way of saying he took the teeth out of the law. Under Trump’s executive order, churches and religious institutions can now engage in electioneering and political spending with very little oversight. What’s worse — billionaires now have an opportunity to engage in tax-free secret political spending, by effectively turning churches into super PACs. (Carli Stevenson, Rootstrikers, May 7, 2017) Virtually every instance of churches violating the law with regard to their 501-c-3 tax exempt status has involved fundamentalist churches; liberal churches rarely use the pulpit to endorse candidates. This order clearly shows the connections between fundamentalist religion, the Trump administration, the Republican party, and a neofascist ideology.
Control is the key word here; today’s Christian Nationalists don’t want an open forum, or a democracy of any kind. Ever since Trump took the oath of office, Republican lawmakers in Congress have been making every effort to strip people of their civil rights. For example, they have been pushing for so-called “right to work” laws. Like so much conservative legislation, this sounds innocuous on the surface, but its meaning is much more ominous. “Right to work” laws aren’t about people’s right to work at all; they already have that right. Rather, they would empower corporations with more control over their employees workplaces, as well as giving them more and more voice in local, state, and federal politics. Such bills would create untold hardships and crises for countless working people throughout the United States. Republicans will ignore all this and insist that their new laws will create more jobs, but this is a boldfaced lie. There will not be more manufacturing, only weaker unions and less empowerment for workers fighting for better wages and working conditions. “Right to work” laws are nothing more than another nationalistic effort to con people into supporting something that is against their own interests.
There is much more. According to the Daily Kos, Republicans are hard at work trying to ensure that they will remain in control: “Republican governors and state legislators are implementing state-by-state plans to gerrymander legislative districts with hyper-partisan maps. In Virginia and Minnesota, Republicans just introduced bills to gerrymander the presidency. They want to give Republican districts even greater weight while Democratic voices are silenced. Democrats could be locked out of the presidency for years to come—meaning we could be facing eight years of President Trump. The Unrig the Map program is critical to stopping the GOP’s relentless gerrymandering against Democrats. Governors play a key role in the redistricting process in 35 states, which determines the playing field for congressional elections. Having a lock on the redistricting process allows GOP governors to rubber stamp gerrymandered maps that distort the electoral process and result in Democrats winning proportionally fewer districts than their percentage of the popular vote. (Kimm Lett, Daily Kos, March 7, 2017) Clearly, Republicans are doing everything they can to rig the electoral process. Their efforts result in them picking their voters, rather than the other way around. It is ignoring and silencing vast populations in our country. Gerrymandering, as utilized by the Republican party, is a serious threat to our democracy.
The Constitutional idea of separation of church and state is of course anathema to the new Christian Nationalists; they view it as a threat to their livelihood when in fact this principle protects both government and religion. But the Nationalists don’t see it that way. They aren’t interested in democracy and having “their place at the table.” To carry the analogy further, what they want is to own the table and call the shots on who is invited to dinner. Today, church/state separation is under attack all across the United States. In our colleges and universities, fundamentalist coaches insist on praying with their players and will not hesitate to punish and bench those who do not wish to participate. Clemson’s head coach, Dabo Swinney, is a case in point. As reported in Church and State magazine, Swinney proselytizes to his players and, in 2014, was accused of “bombarding his team with religious activities, including official team prayers and Bible study, and was accused of busing his players to local churches for Sunday services.” (Simon Brown, Church and State, November 2016)
Some of the most overtly hostile opponents of church/state separation have come out of the woodwork in recent decades. The sheer number of these people, many of whom hold official taxpayer-funded positions in their community and state government, is truly alarming. As an extreme example, consider Roy Moore, Alabama’s former chief justice. Moore provides an excellent example of a man who puts his religious beliefs over the laws of the country and over the interests and well-being of his fellow citizens. His views are truly astounding; he really believes that he has the right and the duty to nullify the laws of the federal government if he feels those laws conflict with the laws of Alabama. In other words, he is arguing for states rights, an issue that should have been settled by the Civil War. In this, he is joined by all too many contemporary Christian Nationalists. Moore’s legal problems began after he had a two-ton monument depicting the Ten Commandments erected and placed at the Judicial Building in Montgomery. He was ordered to remove the monument by a federal appeals court and, when he refused, was tried before the Court of the Judiciary and removed from the Alabama Supreme Court. However, in 2012, he ran again for his old job and won. As one might expect, he was soon in legal hot water again when, after federal corrupts began upholding gay marriage, Moore wrote to Alabama Governor Robert Bentley, telling him to continue enforcing the state’s ban on marriage equality, again bringing up the issue of state’s rights as a legal justification for discrimination. This is not the place for a blow-by-blow account of what transpired from that point onward (interested readers are encouraged to read the story in the November, 2016 issue of Church and State), but the bottom line is that on September 28, 2016, the Alabama Court of the Judiciary found him guilty of violating the laws of the state and permanently removed him from office, without pay. Moore is simply one of countless public servants who think they are representatives of their god and thus a law unto themselves. Not surprisingly, Roy Moore has become a hero to the Republican Nationalists.
Instances such as this are unfortunately not uncommon in these increasingly right-wing United States and, while the Moore case has a happy ending for Constitutional law, the new Christian Nationalists are completely sympathetic towards him and others of his ilk, even though any first-year law student understands that federal courts have the legal right to challenge and, if necessary, nullify state laws.
Flouting the tax-exempt status of the churches in this country, religious conservatives, starting in the 1970s, began to take in enormous amounts of money and use it for their own purposes (it is estimated that only about three percent of the money evangelicals take in actually goes to helping the poor and/or serving the community), a strategy which enabled them to essentially buy their way into power, aided and assisted by a do-nothing Democratic party and an ever-complacent media. Mike Pence views his party as God-ordained; his and their agenda is to turn the United States into nothing less than a Christian theocracy; is it far-fetched to envision the arrival of a new warrior class (the successors of the Gestapo) ever ready to enforce the will of the new theofascists?
As governor of Indiana, Pence authored the misnamed “Religious Freedom Restoration Act” which permitted widespread discrimination against the LGBT community. Notice again how the word “freedom” has been hijacked by yet another lackey of the RRR. At any rate, this law was a huge disaster for Indiana, as company after company reacted by withdrawing their business from the state. Although Pence attempted a mild revision to his law, the damage was done. RRR activists were angry that anything had been altered, and LGBT groups and individuals were dissatisfied, desiring a total repeal of the bill.
“Religious Freedom” has long been a term used by the Christian Right in this country to promote and agenda that has nothing whatever to do with freedom, except for themselves. The misnamed “Religious Freedom Amendment,” also known as the “Istook Amendment” after its author, Rep. Ernest Istook, was an epic case that read: “To secure the people’s right to acknowledge God according to the dictates of conscience: The people’s right to pray and to recognize their religious beliefs, heritage or traditions on public property, including schools, shall not be infringed. The government shall not require any person to join in prayer or other religious activity; initiate or designate school prayers, discriminate against religion, or deny equal access to a benefit on account of religion.” Had this amendment passed, it would have spelled the death sentence for separation between religion and government in this country. It would have restored state-sponsored prayer in the public schools, and opened the door for religious teaching and proselytizing of all students. No matter what views the parents held on religion, teachers would have the power of coercion to force students to pray or engage in sponsored religious activities and could publicly degrade and embarrass students of different faiths or of no faith. It would also have infringed on the rights of parents to determine how their children should be exposed to and taught about religion. Clearly “freedom,” has taken on a new meaning with today’s Christian fundamentalists: The freedom of parents to keep their children free of religious indoctrination was never a consideration of proponents of this bill. Moreover, under the Istook Amendment, subsidies would have been granted for religious institutions and their business dealings. Despite the failure of this amendment in 1998, rest assured that the Trump administration will actively seek to re-introduce similar legislation with the intention of completely removing the wall between religion and government.
But the point is that such an amendment is not even remotely needed as silent public prayers, religious clubs and non-coercive and non-state sponsored group prayers are already protected under the Constitution. As noted by Alex J. Luchenitser of Church and State: “Over the last half-decade, there has been an explosion in the U.S. of litigation in which claims of religious freedom have been used not to defend the rights of believers to practice their faiths without interference from others, but to override laws and regulations intended to protect the rights of women, gay and lesbian people, and other minorities.” (Church and State, November, 2016) Real religious freedom is not enough for today’s Christian theofascists: they want everyone to bow to their demands and have introduced a flood of nonsensical legislative efforts to get it.
Clearly, “Religious freedom” has come to mean anything but freedom. To give but one ludicrous example, a baker refused to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, saying that doing so would impinge on his “religious freedom.” Although far too many right-wing attorneys and judges would agree, this is patently ridiculous on several fronts. First of all, when one opens a business that serves the public, one is guaranteeing that, within certain stated limits (age, dress codes, et al), the owner may not discriminate against customers. Refusing to serve a gay couple is a violation of that principle. The baker’s claim that being “forced” to serve a gay couple somehow violates his religious “freedom” is exactly the same specious reasoning that redneck Southerners used in refusing to serve blacks prior to the 1965 Civil Rights Act. The baker might just as well have put a sign out front saying: “We do not serve gays here.” Civil Rights apply to everyone, gay, straight, black, Muslim, atheist, or anyone else; it does not matter what a business owner’s religious beliefs happen to be: He or she is still free to practice their religion—outside of their business. Freedom of religion does not mean the freedom to discriminate. Faith-based bigotry is still bigotry; it doesn’t matter whether or not it is disguised in religious verbiage. If the baker (or anyone else) is going to discriminate against a given group of people, then they should find another line of employment where they do not serve the general public. The same principles apply to just about every other recent case that religious fanatics have tried to convince the courts of. Common sense says that these kind of lawsuits should be laughed out of court.
Every Christian fundamentalist politician toes the party line when it comes to education: The stated agenda of the Christian Right is to eliminate public education and replace it with Christian-owned schools where indoctrination replaces objective learning. This is done primarily through vouchers; voucher supporters always claim it is about “freedom” (there’s that word again!) and making education better, but statistics have consistently shown that private schools do no better than their than their much-attacked public counterparts. Incidentally, vouchers violate the Constitution since the majority of these schools are religiously based and, under constitutional law, taxpayers are not required to financially support religion in any manner. Arguments that the money is not going to religion but to parents are specious: These parents are merely a conduit to religious schools. What Pence did as governor of Indiana was to divert 53 million dollars from public schools to fund voucher programs for private schools (read: religious funding). He did this without asking for feedback from his constituents. He also repealed Common Core, the first governor to do so. For this and other reasons, the NEA gave Pence an F on their official legislative report card.
To see the disastrous effects voucher programs have on the public, let us examine the state of Wisconsin, which instituted a voucher program back in 1990. Barbara Miner wrote provocatively on this for the Los Angeles Times on February 12, 2017, noting that voucher initiatives have never been put to a public vote but instead forced on citizens who no doubt would not support them. This point cannot be over-emphasized: Again, we see Republican demagogues ignoring the will of the people in order to push their agendas on everyone. Miner wrote that: ”Because they are defined as ‘private,’ voucher schools operate by separate rules, with minimal pubic oversight or transparency. They can sidestep basic constitutional protections such as freedom of speech. They do not have to provide the same level of second-language or special-education services. They can suspend or expel students without legal due process. They can ignore the state’s requirements for open meetings and records. They can disregard state law prohibiting discrimination against students on grounds of sex, pregnancy, sexual orientation, or marital or parental status.” (Barbara Miner, Los Angeles Times, February 12, 2017) Such schools can proselytize at will and teach religious views that may be at odds with public policy and the laws of the state. In other words, private schools can operate as entities unto themselves unaccountable to the public that is forced against their will to subsidize them. If this were not enough, Miner also reports that: “Since 1990, roughly $2 billion in public money has been funneled into private and religious schools in Wisconsin, and the payments keep escalating. This year alone, the tab is some $246 million.” Again, voters have never approved any of this; it was forced on them by theofascist Republican politicians.
Church and State magazine ran an article in November 2016 titled Federal Report Says Voucher Programs Can Leave Disabled Students Behind. That article details the report on vouchers made by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO). The GAO is an independent agency that works for Congress and studies how taxpayer money is being spent. The report was devastating for those advocating vouchers. It noted how voucher programs are “plagued with problems—especially for low-income students and students with disabilities.” The report examined numerous state programs that have been installed throughout the country. The main issue raised was whether or not students from low-income families or those possessing disabilities are receiving the proper federal services as promised by voucher advocates. What was noted was that private schools receiving taxpayer subsidies under the voucher programs invariably fail to provide the necessary services simply because they are uninformed about the types of services they are supposed to provide.
The reasons to fight voucher programs are numerous and definitive. In addition to the above-mentioned reasons, private schools are free to discriminate against students; unlike public schools, they can select who they choose to admit. This means that, under voucher plans, taxpayers are being forced to subsidize schools that are free to discriminate in who they accept. In addition, funding for these schools largely comes from money designated for public schools. Another key point is that, even with voucher funding, many students and their families cannot afford to attend private schools because the money allotted under voucher schemes is not enough to pay the student’s way into private schools. None of this matters to the Republican Nationalists; they want every American to fund religious schools, and the voucher system, despite its unconstitutionality and proven defects, will remain a centerpiece of their agenda. As we have already noted, even though the majority of Americans do not want vouchers, this means nothing to the new Christian Nationalists. Voucher initiatives have been rejected by voters time and again but, as yet another example of the Republican strategy of hijacking words and terms for their own benefit, Christian legislators have re-introduced vouchers under such seemingly benign names as “Education Enhancers” and other similar terms. And, as with everything else on the Nationalist’s agenda, no amount of factual evidence will dissuade them from their goal of destroying public education and replacing it with religiously-oriented indoctrination.
Given all this, Mike Pence’s full support of vouchers should come as no surprise. An article in The Huffington Post illustrates his fundamental dishonesty: “Pence also seems to be as corrupt as his commander-in-chief. When he ran for Congress in 1990, records show that he used political donations not for his campaign, but instead for paying the mortgage on his house, car payments, groceries, and his credit card bill.” (Jerry Bowles, The Huffington Post, October 3, 2016)
This awful man is one single heartbeat away from the presidency. Taken together, Donald Trump and Mike Pence constitute a kakistocracy, which means “rule by the worst possible people.”
We have already noted the racism of Steve Bannon and Jeff Sessions. To insist, as his supporters have, that Trump is not a racist is to ignore all the facts pointing to the contrary. To begin with, consider who he named to his transition team. Climate change denier Myron Ebell has already been mentioned, as has Kris Kobach, Kansas’ Secretary of State, who is the author of what may well be the most blatantly racist piece of legislation offered up in decades: the 2010 SB 1070 law that allowed police to stop anyone of “questionable” skin color or who spoke with an accent and demand proof of their citizenship. Failing to come up with the required documentation meant that the “suspect” could be imprisoned until he/she was able to produce the required documents. This is disturbing on many levels, not the least of which is that it allows state police to discriminate on the basis of race alone. This legislation, rather than being exposed as being obviously racist and un-American, instead inspired some two dozen copycat bills that were soon introduced in other Republican-led states. It took until November, 2016 for this patently racist law to be overturned by the federal courts. As further proof of Kobach’s racism, it should be noted that he spoke to The Social Contract Press (TSCP), a group of White Nationalists in 2015. This group is composed of racists, Holocaust deniers, eugenicists, and other right-wing kooks. For many years, Kobach worked for the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), a group that has been classified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Thus, it is a demonstrable fact that Trump enlisted the aid of a man who has not learned the lessons of the Civil War to his transition team.
Do any of Trump’s appointees possess the ability to re-unite a divided country, as he famously promised to do during his campaign? Or are they representative of a truly frightening political development in this country, one which threatens our environment, our livelihood, and our status in world affairs? Are they diplomats or demagogues? Are they statesmen or special interest lackeys? Christian theofacsists or statesmen? Should we “give them a chance” to destroy our country, our wildlife, our environment, our clean air, and our future? Clearly not.
DESTRUCTION OF THE PLANET
The Republican party of today has an unhidden agenda of overturning all legislation designed to protect our environment and the wildlife that lives here.
Texas’ Pete Olson wasted no time in jumping on the anti-environment bandwagon, introducing a bill that threatens the Endangered Species Act. This bill would require government agencies to consider the economic costs of protecting endangered species and allow them to give oil and gas profits priority over the survival of these species. As Earthjustice notes: “The Endangered Species Act is one of the strongest, most effective wildlife protection laws in the world. It was passed with overwhelming bipartisan support more than 40 years ago to provide a legal safety net for wildlife, fish and plant species that are in danger of extinction. Now this Congress—which is shaping up to be the most anti-wildlife Congress we have ever seen—wants to slash the Endangered Species Act, threatening the very existence of the imperiled wildlife and ecosystems the Act protects. Biologists warn that our planet is facing a sixth wave of mass extinction. The Endangered Species Act, which has prevented 99 percent of the species under its care from vanishing, is precisely the kind of effective tool we need today. It has revived the bald eagle, the American alligator, the California condor and many others. Yet anti-environment interests in the House and Senate are currently orchestrating some of the most serious threats ever posed to the Endangered Species Act.
Some of the legislative proposals put specifically imperiled wildlife species on the chopping block, while others attack core provisions of the Endangered Species Act itself. House Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop (R-UT) has said he wants to ‘repeal and replace’ the Endangered Species Act….During the previous (114th) Congress, anti-wildlife representatives authored more than 100 bills and amendments to undermine the Endangered Species Act. Similar legislative attacks are already being introduced in the current (115th) Congress. These proposals would put imperiled species at greater risk by: (1) Establishing arbitrary land boundaries where species protections would not apply. (2) Imposing limitations on the ability of citizens to help enforce the Endangered Species Act. (3) Undermining the use of science under the Endangered Species Act. (4) Declaring open season on individual species, including wolves and sage grouse, by blocking federal protections or denying existing protections.” (Earthjustice, April 26, 2017) Clearly, today’s Republicans have gone so far to the right of their counterparts of forty years ago that they don’t even remotely resemble each other.
Further proof of how the Republican-led Congress has declared war on wildlife is seen in the email sent out by the Center for Biological Diversity: “Congress is trying to write a death warrant for thousands of wolves. This week politicians are scrambling to pass a federal budget—and almost certainly they’ll try to sneak in a provision to gut protections for wolves in the Great Lakes states. And then it’ll quickly be on the desk of Donald Trump—who’s made no secret of his war on wildlife. The result will be wolf families shattered, pups orphaned and packs decimated.” (Kieran Suckling, Center for Biological Diversity, April 26, 2017)
The Trump administration clearly has no problem with destroying the flora and fauna of our country; the destruction of our planet means nothing to them; the lives of animals and the habitats they need to survive mean nothing to them, and the lives of citizens mean nothing to them. Is this how Trump intends to “make America great again?”
A startling but by no means atypical example of this threat can be seen in the dealings of the Enbridge company, whose goal is to double the capacity of tar sands coming into the United States from Canada via its Alberta Clipper pipeline. Enbridge has a horrific track record on oil spills: they were responsible for over eight hundred spills between 1999 and 2010. Three of the most devastating oil spills in the United States were Enbridge’s doing. The Kalamazoo River “spill” was an ecological disaster: almost a million gallons of toxic tar sands crude was dumped into Michigan’s waterways. In addition to making local residents sick, it cost over a billion dollars to clean up the mess.
Of course, oil spills and other ecological disasters mean nothing to the Trump administration. First of all, Trump wants to open up some 73 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean to oil drilling. This despite the fact that there have been no new safety regulations implemented since the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010, which killed 11 people and dumped some 134 million gallons of crude oil into the Gulf. Two years later, it was reportedly still leaking. This was an ecological disaster of the first magnitude; Louisiana reported that 4,900,000 pounds of oily material had been cleaned up from the beaches in 2013, three years after the spill! In addition, cleanup crews were, at that date, still working four days a week to clean up a 55 mile stretch of shoreline. None of this will penetrate the thinking of Trump and Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke (or anyone else in the cabinet); they will go ahead with their plans, in the process risking the livelihood of countless Gulf Coast communities dependent on fishing and tourism.
There is much more than just drilling at stake. Consider what Environment America has to say about the administration’s plans for the Atlantic Ocean: “Oil companies want to use seismic blasting in the Atlantic Ocean in their hunt for oil —and the Interior Department just might let them…In January, former President Obama denied permits from six companies seeking to use seismic cannons to search for oil beneath the ocean floor. It was part of his administration’s efforts to close the door to offshore drilling in the Atlantic. Now, as President Trump reopens our oceans to offshore drilling, those six companies are appealing to the Department of the Interior. Seismic airgun blasts harm whales, dolphins and other marine life—especially those that depend on sonar to communicate and hunt for food—and they drive away the fish that coastal economies depend on. A study by the Interior Department found that seismic blasting could injure 138,000 marine mammals, and disrupt feeding, breeding and behavioral patterns of 13.6 million more. The blasts are 100,000 times more intense than a jet engine, and they’re repeated every 10 seconds, 24 hours a day, for days or weeks on end. And if that weren’t bad enough, if their seismic exploration finds oil, they’re going to want to drill it. We’ve all seen the disasters that happen when we drill in our oceans. In 2010, the Deepwater Horizon spill in the Gulf spewed more than 210 million gallons of oil into the sea before it was finally stopped.” (Anna Aurillo, Environment America, May 20, 2017)
It is interesting that ecological disasters such as those listed above are never reported as the threats and disasters they actually are; the very word “spill” makes it sound like a minor kitchen incident that could be mopped up in a minute. This would be comical (Gallagher once did a skit on it) were it not such a danger to us all. The consequences would be devastating had the pipeline been carrying twice the amount, which is what will happen if the Trump administration allows them to expand the pipeline. This will no doubt occur as the mainstream media—again—ignores real issues affecting real people; in February 2017 the State Department issued a statement saying they didn’t think the expansion would harm the environment at all. No facts, just a statement of opinion, one that conveniently aligns itself with the interests of the big polluters.
Trump and his fossil fuel friends are stepping up their agenda. Daily Kos reports that: “Donald Trump, corporate polluters and their allies in Congress want to pass a new bill that would make it much harder to put in place new environmental protections for our air, water and health. While it’s called the Regulatory Accountability Act, they got the name wrong. It should be called the ‘Risk to Americans Act’—because this reckless bill will make it easier for corporate polluters to block new health and safety standards and to dodge responsibility for the environmental damage they cause…We can’t trust big polluters to police themselves. It’s just another way for polluting corporations to block new health and safety standards, and dodge responsibility for the environmental damage they cause. The result would be more pollution, more illness and disease and more hardship for everyday Americans. Nobody should be getting salmonella from a tainted jar of peanut butter, or listeria from an unscreened carton of milk, or cancer from exposure to known carcinogens like asbestos. Those are the threats we face if the so-called Regulatory Accountability Act passes into law.” (NRDC Action Fund, via Daily Kos, May 21, 2017)
Taken together, these appointments conclusively illustrate the devastation that Trump’s administration threatens to wreak on our planet and the various life forms (including humans) living on it. Give him a chance? To do what? To see how much drinking water is polluted before we call him to task? To see how many schoolchildren become asthmatic due to all the new coal plants he has promised to build? To see how much global temperatures rise now that the United States has withdrawn from the Paris Climate deal? To see how many million gallons of oil are spilled in the Arctic Ocean? To see how many animal species become extinct as we expand our drilling and destroy more and more of their natural habitats in the process? How much devastation must be wrought by this man and his cronies before people wake up and say: Enough!
On June 1, 2017, Trump made one of the most stupid announcements of his presidency when he said that the U.S. would be withdrawing from the Paris climate pact. This action, although long anticipated, generated much more angry backlash than Trump’s administration had anticipated. What this action means is that the United States is retreating from its role as a leader in the global effort against climate change. Offering an extreme nationalistic rationalization for his action, Trump said: “It is time to put Youngstown, Ohio; Detroit, Michigan; and Pittsburgh Pennsylvania…before Paris France.” Trump went on, insisting that the climate agreement: “Would undermine our economy, hamstring our workers, weaken our sovereignty…and put us at a permanent disadvantage to the outer countries of the world.” Trump, showing that he is unable to distinguish between friend and foe, lashed out at the countries supporting the agreement, saying that they had done so because it was: “A massive redistribution of United States wealth to other countries.” The Los Angeles Times report on the withdrawal noted: “The president said the accord would allow China, India and other major polluters to continue emitting greenhouse gases while imposing unfair burdens on the U.S., and it would cost millions of American jobs.” (Evan Halper and Alexandra Zavis, Los Angeles Times, June 2, 2017)
The Times rightly took issue with this in the subsequent paragraph: “The raw deal for the country that Trump described contrasts sharply with the view of many Republican business leaders, who had lobbied the White House against making this move. They and other supporters of action to combat climate change say that policies designed to limit global warming are helping the U.S. economy by building up new industries, especially solar and wind power.” These facts of course mean nothing to Trump: His only loyalties are to those in the fossil fuel industry. They are the reason for the withdrawal. The consensus of the rest of the world, the scientific community, and the majority of American citizens were not to be considered.
Reaction against Trump’s decision to withdraw came from all across the globe. Even corporations like General Electric, the Ford Motor Company and Dow Chemical expressed their dismay. Elon Musk, the founder of Tesla Inc. who had served on Trump’s advisory council, quit due to this decision. And across the country, governors and mayors began efforts to assure our allies that Trump does not speak for most Americans on this issue. In fact within hours of Trump’s announcement, the U.S. Climate Alliance was formed, the goal being to bring states together in upholding the Paris agreement. Environment America picks up on this, noting: “Hundreds of cities in the United States and around the world have already pledged to accelerate carbon reductions to meet the goals of the historic Paris accord. With smart local organizing, they’ll stay on track despite President Trump’s latest move. And nine states are currently considering strengthening America’s best climate and clean air program, the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. Backing down from the emissions reduction targets we set in the Paris Accord will put us years behind other nations, slowing the clean energy revolution—but it doesn’t have to stop it. That’s because, when it comes to renewable energy, it’s not a matter of if but when. Solar energy grew at a record-breaking pace in 2016. Cities all across the country are doing more to grow their solar capacity—San Diego, San Antonio, Denver, Washington, D.C., and Indianapolis are all among the top 20 American cities with the most solar energy installed. There are some oil and gas companies who are standing in the way of progress, but the more people call for 100% renewable power, the more elected officials and corporations will listen. Clean energy is simply good business.” (Anna Aurillo, Environment America, June 2, 2017) Ah, but it’s not good for the fossil fuel industry, you see.
Syria and Nicaragua are the only other nations to denounce the Paris agreement. No other major world power denies what all the leading scientists are telling us: The Paris climate agreement is designed to reduce carbon emissions and other greenhouse gases in order to halt rising temperatures more than 2 degrees Celsius compared with pre-industrial levels. Rising above that level, scientists warn, and global leaders recognize, pose grave threats to our environment; to cite but one example, because of so much melting of global ice caps, certain coastal cities in the U.S. will soon find themselves under water. Huge sections of Louisiana and Florida, for example, will be devastated by the effects of unchecked global warming. Ironically, Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida may be one of the first casualties unless, of course, Trump builds a wall around it!
But it is not just the United States that would feel the effects of this massive meltdown. The Arctic Resilience Report has stated that, despite it’s distance, the Indian ocean could feel its effects. It also notes that: “Temperatures in the Arctic are currently about 20C above what would be expected for the time of year, which scientists describe as ‘off the charts.’ Sea ice is at the lowest extent ever recorded for the time of year.” (The Guardian, November 25, 2016) The report goes on to note: “‘The warning signals are getting louder,’ said Marcus Carson of the Stockholm Environment Institute and one of the lead authors of the report.”
Trump’s disastrous decision not only removes America from its leadership role on the world stage, it now makes us appear a force for the wrong, rather than the right. And it will take years, and another administration, to change that perception of our country.
The only positive side to this ridiculous situation is that Trump’s completely irrational, short-sighted move will not take effect for another four years, thus ensuring that this will be a key issue in the 2020 presidential election. Within two days of Trump’s action California, led by governor Jerry Brown, had taken the lead in honoring the Paris accord, and dozens of states and cities, as well as over 160 mayors across the United States had done the same. And, in one of the great ironies of this administration, on the very day that Trump announced the withdrawal, three major coal-fired power plants closed their doors. Clearly, no matter what Trump says and how much he and his fossil fuel cronies hate it, the fact remains that there is a: “National trend toward phasing out coal-fired power plants in the face of tighter regulations and competition from cheap natural gas.” (Barbara Demick, Los Angeles Times, June 2, 2017) The article quotes Jeff Tittel of the Sierra Club: “The timing is kind of ironic. They are closing these plants the same day that Trump is pulling out of Paris. It shows that no matter what the president does, the country is moving towards cleaner sources of energy.” The article closes on a positive note: “According to a tally kept by the Sierra Club, 253 of the nation’s more than 500 coal plants have closed or are scheduled to close by 2021.” No wonder Trump and his fossil fuel pals are feeling the pinch!
It’s almost funny, in a sick sort of way, that the same Republicans who are always screaming about states rights are the same ones that have no problem interfering with the activities of states seeking to protect themselves from the ravages of Trump’s support for dirty fuel. Environment America explains: “Despite inaction at the federal level, states have been forging ahead with ambitious clean energy programs, cleaning up the environment and allowing communities to thrive…Department of Energy Secretary Rick Perry recently said, in regard to state renewable standards, ‘There may be issues that are so important that the federal government can intervene.’” (Anna Aurillo, Environment America, May 30, 2017)
Federal intervention to kill state clean energy policies would be devastating. Today, 29 states have renewable energy standards, which require that utilities generate power from renewable sources. We should be strengthening and expanding these programs, not rolling them back.
But now, there are rumblings that the Trump administration wants to go after those programs — specifically state renewable energy standards — in order to prop up dirty fossil fuels.
The benefits of cleaner sources of energy are multitudinous and obvious. For example, Environment America noted: “Solar power has seen explosive growth in recent years. Rooftop solar panel installation alone has grown by as much as 900% just since 2011, and we now have enough solar to power 8.3 million homes.” (Environment America, July 23, 2017) Despite these obvious benefits: “The pro-solar policies that helped fuel solar’s growth are now coming under fire in just about every state in the country. And if we don’t stop them, they could dim the prospects for renewable energy across the United States. Forty-one states have net metering laws in place, which allow solar customers to sell excess solar energy back to the grid at retail price. It’s one of the strongest incentives out there for Americans to install solar panels on their homes. But now, thanks to the lobbying of traditional utilities in state capitols across the country, nearly every one of those states is reviewing its solar energy policies. Already, Hawaii, Arizona, Maine and Indiana have decided to phase out net metering, and utilities are pushing more states to consider new or higher fees on solar customers.” This of course can only hurt consumers. Progress clearly works against the interests of entrenched companies financial interests. And of course, President Trump is fighting for those interests. Not only are he and Rick Perry proposing cuts to clean energy funding, they trying to eliminate government research and development into new energy technologies altogether! Naturally, if successful, this will be disastrous not only for climate change, but it will put countless future clean energy jobs at risk. This is what conservatism has come to mean: fighting progress at every step in order to save traditional businesses. But as history has conclusively shown, one cannot stop progress. Solar energy and other forms of clean energy are here to stay and will only grow. Conservatives trying to save fossil fuel and utility special interests are only prolonging their death throes.
Action is already being taken to phase out fossil fuels and replace them with clean alternatives. Credo Action sent an email which says: “Progressive champions Sens. Jeff Merkley and Bernie Sanders have just introduced the 100 By ’50 Act, sweeping climate legislation to wean the United States completely off fossil fuels by 2050. Specifically, the bill would: (1) Require all electric utilities to begin phasing out fossil fuel use in 2021 and stop burning fossil fuels entirely by 2050. (2) Provide grants for clean energy, energy efficiency and public transportation projects to low income communities. (3) Help workers currently employed in the fossil fuel industry find employment in the industries of the future. (4) Make major investments in zero emissions vehicles. (5) End new fossil fuel infrastructure investments like the Dakota Access (which is already leaking, polluting water and posing health threats to millions of people) and Keystone XL pipelines. (5) Impose a carbon duty on carbon-intensive products imported from other countries.” While eminently sensible, legislation such as this stands no chance in today’s political climate wherein Republicans are calling all the shots. Rest assured they will attack any legislation resembling this with everything they have. Nonetheless, it is to be hoped that this or similar legislation will be taken in the future—after Trump and his sorry cast of misfits are no longer in power.
Clearly, Trump’s presidency threatens the world with nothing short of ecological disaster. Trump has vowed to lift all restrictions on offshore drilling. He allowed the Keystone Pipeline project to move forward, which threatens to destroy all wildlife in its path. As Credo reported: “The pipeline would cut through the massive Sandhills region in north-central Nebraska, a fragile region of sand dunes and prairie grass home to endangered species such as the whooping and sandhill cranes, bald eagles and the burying beetle. Potential oil spills from the pipeline would be devastating and could contaminate the Ogallala Aquifer, one of the world’s largest underground freshwater sources. The aquifer supplies drinking water for millions people in the region and provides irrigation for 20 percent of the nation’s farmland.” (Josh Nelson, Credo, April 13, 2017) None of this is of concern to the Trump administration, which has already issued the final federal permits for the pipeline.
Almost alone among world leaders and certainly among scientists, Trump denies climate change and has promised to gut the funding for all climate change programs. Interestingly it was Richard Nixon, a Republican, who created the Environmental Protection Agency, the much-hated EPA constantly under attack by today’s right-wing extremists. This is yet another example of how far to the right today’s Republicans have gone. So who did Trump appoint as his Secretary of the Agriculture? Trump’s initial choice was Congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers, who has repeatedly voted to open up protected lands to drilling, mining, and logging. In the last two decades, she has accepted $510,025 from various fossil fuel companies. As noted by the Sierra Club: “Rodgers voted to sell protected lands to mining companies and expand fossil fuel development. Big Oil and King Coal will only bring roads, industrial machinery, toxic waste, pollution and ultimately devastation to our public lands. Wildlife — bears, wolves, condors, bison — will suffer and die. Parks and forests where people spend time with their families could be covered with roads and drill pads.” (Michael Brune, Sierra Club, December 10, 2016) Although Sonny Perdue was eventually given the post rather than Rodgers, this is by no stretch of the imagination a better choice. The brutal fact is that the oil and gas industries emit a constant stream of methane and other forms of toxic pollution into the air. We are already seeing the results of these noxious poisonings; what else could be the cause for the increasing number of children with asthma? And even though some two-thirds of American voters want to place limits on the amounts of poison these industries can emit, Trump has made it clear that he intends to roll back the standards for these emissions to please the climate change deniers and, more significantly, the industry lobbyists who worked so hard to get him elected (some of whom are now in his cabinet). Put simply, Donald Trump intends to declare war on the environment and on the policies that protect our environment and our health.
Earthjustice gives us an example of the kind of thinking that pervades the mind of the Trump administration: “When the Chevron crude oil refinery in Richmond, Calif., caught fire in August 2012, it endangered 1,200 workers and first responders and caused nearly 15,000 community residents to seek medical treatment. Industrial facility disasters like this are too common in the United States—but they don’t have to be. The Environmental Protection Agency, in consultation with the Department of Homeland Security, has developed modest but important updates to the safety rules for industrial facilities—including oil refineries like Chevron Richmond—that use or store large amounts of very dangerous chemicals. For reasons that defy logic and good sense, these life-saving safety measures are under attack by chemical companies, Big Oil and the EPA’s new administrator, Scott Pruitt, who has been supporting industry’s effort to stop these new safety measures since before he took office.” (Earthjustice, May 9, 2017) The article goes on to note: “In the 10 years leading up to these rules, 1,500 chemical fires, releases or explosions at chemical facilities around the country wrought over $2 billion in property damage, invoked evacuation or ‘shelter in place’ orders for half a million people—and led to 17,099 injuries and 58 deaths.” Trump’s administration has no problem at all reverting to those days. Clearly, health and safety are of no concern to this administration.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
Let us turn to Trump’s refusal to divest himself and his family from his various business interests. To begin with, the obvious conflicts of interest arising from Trump’s business dealings and his presidency must be mentioned. No problem at all, according to Trump. On November 22, 2016, he said he was completely free to use the White House to advance his various business interests and that nobody could stop him from doing so. He said: “the president can’t have a conflict of interest,” thereby invoking the old Nixon claim that if the president does it, it isn’t illegal. Never mind that this is unconstitutional or that Trump contradicted himself on this when he promised during the campaign he would cut ties with his businesses. Keep in mind that the “liberal” press had vilified Hillary Clinton during the campaign for anything that supposedly reeked of conflict of interest. But when the much more obvious conflicts with Trump came up, even from his own mouth, the press, yet again, collectively failed in its duties and ignored the issue. Trump’s continued defiance of putting his interests in a blind trust constitutes an impeachable act. As I write this, six months into his presidency, Trump and his family have cost Americans huge amounts of money, which is lining the president’s own pockets. Since taking office, Trump has doubled his membership fees at his “Winter White House,” Mar-a-Lago in Florida. Max Boot, a conservative (yes, a conservative) journalist, thoroughly disgusted with Trump, wrote a piece which among other things noted: “His sons, who are running his real estate empire, continue to pursue lucrative deals with dubious, politically connected tycoons from Turkey, Dubai, Malaysia and other countries.” (“Trump’s ‘unpresidented’ list of firsts,” Max Boot, Los Angeles Times, April 4, 2017) In addition, government officials are spending time at his different facilities, at taxpayer expense, and Trump is clearly profiting from those stays. In his first three months as president, he spent over $25 million in taxpayer money on his retreats. What is this if not profiteering from his presidency? Virtually all his businesses have gotten significantly richer since January 20, which means Trump is literally taking money from taxpayer’s pockets. That is conflict of interest; there is no way to sugar-coat it. Again, this is an impeachable offense and must be recognized as such. Where are the honest lawmakers willing to call him to task?
Naturally, the same Republicans who are doing everything they can to defund Planned Parenthood and destroy public education are conspicuously silent about Trump’s spending millions of taxpayer dollars on trips to Mar-a-Lago. This is one of the more ridiculous examples of Republican hypocrisy. Is anyone in congress concerned about all this?
There is at least one. Rep. Earl Blumenauer, a Democrat from Oregon, introduced the No Taxpayer Revenue Used to Monetize the Presidency Act (No TRUMP Act) on March 9, 2017. This bill would stop the flow of taxpayer money used to pay for events, overnight stays, food, and various other expenses at hotels owned or operated by a president or his family. Trump’s refusal to completely divest himself of his businesses has become more and more of an issue as his presidency continues unchecked. Although it is unlikely that anything will come of this bill given Republican control of Congress and the fact that the President himself would have to sign it for it to pass, it is hoped that it may come to pass in the future. No such legislation has been necessary before, because previous presidents have put their finances in a blind trust upon assuming the presidency.
Clearly, Trump has no intention of stopping the mixing of his personal business interests with his responsibilities as president. During his meeting with British politician Nigel Farage in November 2016, Trump asked Farage to make every effort to halt the proposed wind farms that Trump thinks will block the view from a golf course he owns in Scotland. And, of course, when this was mentioned in the New York Times, Trump responded in typical fashion: “Prior to the election it was well known that I have interests all over the world. Only the crooked media makes this a big deal!” (Hunter, Daily Kos, November 22, 2016) So, in other words, the Times is attacking him for daring to report that the Constitution explicitly forbids the president from accepting gifts from foreign leaders without permission from Congress. Further proof of yet another impeachable offense.
Trump is an avid golfer, and plays the sport constantly—at taxpayer’s expense. The supreme irony is that, given the fact that he made a big issue out of Obama’s vacation time, particularly on the golf course, Trump has spent much more time at the links, all at taxpayer expense. Obama’s first hundred days saw him on the course once, whereas the first hundred days of Trump’s administration saw him playing no less than nineteen times. The hypocrisy of this man is staggering!
A mere three months into his presidency, taxpayers had already been forced to foot the bill for his constant trips to his beach club Mar-A-Lago—a staggering $21.6 million. Even more ridiculous is the cost of his wife’s Secret Service detail in New York for 2017: up to an even more staggering $183 million! These ridiculous, immoral and clearly illegal costs come at a time when the president is doing his level best to slash or eliminate governmental spending for environmental programs, public schools, the arts, etc. This isn’t just wrong, it’s criminal.
Here’s another example: The Trump-owned hotel in Washington is being promoted as a way for foreign dignitaries to get on Trump’s good side—while the profits from their stay goes directly into Trump’s coffers. Think about this: a diplomat can curry favor with the president by staying at a hotel the president owns and gets income from. If this isn’t the stuff of a real scandal, what is? This is so much worse than any of the alleged scandals Trump has accused Hillary Clinton of that it’s almost laughable. Trump is brazenly open about all this; it’s almost as if he’s telling everyone: “go ahead and do something about it. I dare you.” And, as usual, the media response has been a stifled yawn; it’s just Donald being Donald.
Exactly how many scandals were there during Obama’s administration?
It’s quite funny that, back on June 14, 1014, Trump, referring to Obama, opined: “Are you allowed to impeach a president for gross incompetence?” Possibly. But a president is definitely impeachable if he/she does something unconstitutional or mixes their own private business affairs with those of the country. That being the case, Trump was impeachable even prior to taking the oath of office. In fact, within two weeks of his swearing in, a Public Policing Polling poll showed that forty percent of Americans favored his impeachment!
There are too many examples of Trump’s waffling and wiggling to list in a single article, but let’s consider a few of them. The same man who in 2012 said: “The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy” failed to say anything at all on the subject after the college decided the election in his favor. Instead, he has persisted in claiming that there were millions of “illegal voters” who voted for Hillary Clinton. This is a typical Trump strategy: when faced with an uncomfortable fact, he goes on the offensive and invents some charge against his opponents.
On November 18, 2016 a most interesting thing occurred, something that should have been a major media event. Trump, who had stated during his campaign that he would never settle a lawsuit against his phony “university” (he called it “a matter of principle”) suddenly announced on that day that we would agree to a 25 million dollar settlement for defrauding those students, who noted that the “university” did not impart them with any significant education on real estate. Part of the settlement was a one million dollar payment to the state of New York for various violations of state law. Of course, Trump put a typical spin move on all this, calling it a “victory” since the payoff was allegedly only a fraction of what he could have lost had the lawsuit been carried through. Without doubt, this story should have received major media coverage. Inexplicably, it did not. A president-elect paying out twenty-five million dollars in settlement money a mere two months before assuming the presidency did not warrant the attention of the New York Times, even though the state’s Attorney General, Eric Schneiderman, was the man who had put the case together. Likewise, despite the connection between the “university” and “contributions” (read: bribes) to Florida’s Attorney General), the Miami Herald failed to cover the story.
Let us not forget that when he was running for president, one of Trump’s key campaign promises was to “drain the swamp,” meaning he said he would close the loopholes that allow huge corporations and multi-nationals to play by a different set of rules than the rest of Americans do. In other words, Trump promised a “fairer” and simpler tax code that would benefit most Americans. Given his subsequent actions, there can be no denying the fact that this was another empty promise, another lie; he has no intention of doing what he promised and in fact is doing the exact opposite: he wants to allow these huge benefits and subsidies to continue for his corporate cronies. If he has his way, the rest of us will have no recourse. So much for Trump “cleaning the swamp.” He just wants to own the swamp and enlarge it for his own use—and that of his millionaire/billionaire buddies.
As further proof of the chasm between Trump’s campaign promises and what he is actually delivering, consider this: During his campaign, he promised to eliminate the inheritance tax. This did not receive too much attention, but the point is that the inheritance tax only applies to individuals who have more than $5.5 million in assets, and couples who have more than $11 million. So, even though this has been called “eliminating the death tax,” all it really is is yet another gift to the richest Americans.
Many of those who voted for Trump did so because they imagine him to be a successful businessman. Just how successful a businessman is Donald Trump? Although he ran his campaign focusing on his business acumen and success, there are many facts to consider here. First of all, he did not start from “scratch”; his father was a wealthy real estate developer who gave him the head start.
Let us start off by asking just how much this man is actually worth. Trump himself, not surprisingly, is more than just a little bit cagey about revealing his assets and net worth; he has even threatened to sue anyone who suggests he is exaggerating about his wealth. We have already noted his refusal to release his tax returns, a central issue during the campaign and afterwards, which Hillary Clinton rightly focused on. Trump’s tax returns just may indicate that he may not actually own vast portions of his empire; according to Rolling Stone: “Most Trump-branded projects and products are built and sold by third parties, and Trump only makes a relative sliver of money off them by licensing his name. By Trump’s measure, his name is his most valuable asset.” (Tessa Stuart, Rolling Stone, March 14, 2016) The article also lists some of his more noteworthy business failures, including:
***Trump Airlines. Trump took out a $245 million dollar loan to buy the planes and their scheduled routes. Within two years, the airline wasn’t even able to keep up with its one million dollar a month interest payment, so Trump defaulted and sold his ownership to his creditors.
***”Trump: The Game.” This was a board game that resulted from Trump’s partnership with Milton Bradley. The game was a flop, despite the hype and advertising, and was discontinued after two years in 1990.
***Trump Casinos. This is an often touted example of Trump’s failures as a businessman. The Trump Taj Mahal was the first of these, launched in 1990 and already three billion dollars in debt the following year! Trump Marina and Trump Plaza Casinos, along with a riverboat casino in Indiana also did major financial bellyflops, landing Trump in bankruptcy court in 2004. He is estimated to have lost almost two billion dollars in these failed enterprises. The Rolling Stone article notes: “After the bankruptcy, Trump Hotels and Casino Resorts reorganized as Trump Entertainment Resorts Inc. Four years later, Trump Entertainment Resorts missed an interest payment on a $53.1 million bond; the company declared bankruptcy, and this time Trump stepped down as its chairman.”
***Trump Mortgage. Trump’s alleged business acumen couldn’t have been more off-base back in 2006 when he told CNBC: “I think it’s a great time to start a mortgage company.” And: “The real-estate market is going to be very strong for a long time to come.” In fact, the market had been on the skids for some time before this, and collapsed within a few months of Trump’s prediction. When Trump Mortgage predictably took a financial nosedive Trump, also predictably, blamed his executives.
***Trump Steaks. Abysmal sales here resulted in most of these steaks being removed from the shelves within a couple of months of the new enterprise’s founding.
***Trump Vodka. This was an odd choice for a business focus for Trump, a teetotaler. Perhaps this fact discouraged people from purchasing the product, and it was completely off the market by 2011, five years after it began.
***Trump Tower Tampa. This was a particularly costly mis-adventure for Trump enterprises. A 52 story high-rise was not built or designed by Trump; he merely sold his name to the condo to developers. By the time the Tower went belly-up in 2008, the only assets that were named in bankruptcy court totaled a mere $3500 in value. Buyers sued Trump, who eventually settled out-of-court. Even so, the plaintiffs had to settle for a fraction of their original investments.
The Rolling Stone article also lists Trump’s Travel Site, his two colognes, his lines of menswear, and Trump’s mattresses as similar business failures.
So, to reiterate, just how wealthy is this man?
Considering the vast number of lawsuits, and the vast number of debts he has incurred, and examination of his real assets might paint a vastly different financial picture than the one he presents, or his supporters believe. The Daily Kos notes: “We know that he promised to ‘self-fund’ his campaign, and yet not only did he not ‘self-fund’ it, he charged HUGE fees to his campaign to use Trump property. We also know that he never had anywhere near enough campaign money. From the beginning, the ‘Billionaire’ had the ‘poorest’ campaign.” (4CasandChlo, Daily Kos, December 31, 2016) Even more tellingly, the article notes: “He promised to donate all that money made in one evening to veterans groups, and had not done so when checked-in on, months later. (This is part of the larger pattern, a ‘foundation’ that he never paid money into, and hadn’t paid a lot of real money out of, one under criminal investigation. Most true billionaires have real foundations with real people who really help various causes because it helps business. It’s more polite to be worth billions if one can point to the appearance of ‘doing good’ and yet Trump can’t even do that).”
The more one looks at the objective facts, the more Donald Trump begins to look less like an astute businessman and more like an irresponsible and dishonest profiteer.
Senior citizens will be among the hardest hit during Trump’s reign of terror. His first budget plan revealed that he intends to completely de-fund the Community Development Block program, which funds programs like Meals on Wheels, a program that countless seniors on limited budgets depend on. Without this program, many citizens will have to pay for expensive medical treatments rather than get them at substantial reductions at home. Trump also plans to eliminate the Senior Community Service Program, a program that assists low-income seniors in finding a job.
THE MEDIA, OBAMA, MONEY, AND THE ALT-RIGHT
Let us begin by examining the role played by the media in Donald Trump’s victory. The job of the various media outlets is simple: They should be disseminating the best available information of the facts at hand in a non-partisan, objective manner. But ever since the Watergate scandal, these standards have become more and more slanted in favor of the Republican party. The media of today simply does not hold Republicans to the same standards it does Democrats. They will report Trump’s latest asinine statements and comment on his behavior, but that’s as far as it goes. The things that really matter are either ignored or else given scant attention. Despite the above-mentioned scandals, the word “scandal” is notoriously absent from major media coverage of Trump. The same obviously was not true concerning Hillary Clinton’s email “scandal.” Trump can do just about anything he wants and the media will turn attention elsewhere. It is singularly amazing that the press seems so intent on finding hidden scandals on Democrats yet turns the other way when an obvious one concerning a Republican is presented to them. Stories like Schneiderman’s, if they are covered at all, are usually found hidden in the deep recesses of an inside page. What the press did cover, on the front page no less, was the story about Pence’s allegedly being “harassed” while attending a Broadway play. The “harassment” consisted of a comment made by a cast member after the play who had the courage to say to Pence: “Thank you for joining us at Hamilton: An American Musical. We are the diverse America who are alarmed and anxious that your new administration will not protect us, our planet, our children, our parents, or defend us and uphold our inalienable rights. We hope this show has inspired you to uphold our American values, and work on behalf of all of us. Thank you.” Is this harassment or a plea from a concerned American that the new administration just might not bring, as Trump promised, unity to the country and defend all of its citizens? Trump’s response was to demand an apology from the cast members for “insulting” Pence. At this point, the white nationalists began demanding that people boycott the show; the following day, a mob of neo-nazis convened to show what real harassment is all about. Trump’s comments on this? None whatsoever. While the media reported everything up to and including Trump’s demand for an apology to his VP, they never mentioned what followed. Just what are the media’s priorities? Who are they really interested in protecting?
The media has shown itself to be incredibly, perhaps criminally irresponsible for consistently failing to refute not only the multitudinous lies of Trump and his cronies, but the countless erroneous ideas that have been promulgated against Obama, Hillary Clinton, and other Democrats. As but one example, National Public Radio has stated that its policy is will never refer to a lie made by a U.S. president as a lie. So much for their journalistic honesty and integrity. One can only wonder if that policy will still be in play should a Democrat be elected our next president.
Amazingly, despite the free ride the mainstream media has accorded him, Donald Trump and his minions still view them as hostile enemies. in February 2017, Steve Bannon made a clear threat when he told the mainstream media that: “it’s going to get worse every day for the media.” His message was thus crystal clear: Trump and his administration view the media as the enemy, and their goal is to totally destroy objective reporting so that their “alternative facts” become the only facts the American people actually hear. Alternative facts, put simply, means nothing more than lies; if truth is subjective, than anyone can say anything and not be held accountable. Which is exactly what the Trump administration wants. Given this, can any thinking American deny that we are seeing a proto-fascist government at work here?
Trump has never let up in his attacks on his predecessor and has created numerous “alternative facts” which his followers have eagerly absorbed. In a Daily Kos article dated December 9, 2016, some of these errors were clearly outlined. As the article noted: “The stock market under President Obama soared. The Dow Jones Industrial average went from 7,949.09 to 19,614.91, again, up 11,665.72. In other words, it more than doubled. 39% of Trump voters think the stock market went down under Obama.” (Egberto Willies, Daily Kos, December 9, 2016) The same article also noted that 67% of Trump’s supporters believe that unemployment rose during Obama’s tenure, when in fact it dropped from 7.8% to 4.6%. The article also noted that: “40% of Trump voters believe that Donald Trump won the popular vote. 60% of Trump voters believe that millions voted illegally for Clinton. 73% of Trump voters believe that George Soros paid Trump protesters. 29% of Trump voters believe California vote should not be included in the popular vote.” The article concluded by noting: “And now as the Trump administration takes shape, they have to know that they are in power thanks to their voter base that has these false beliefs about the country.” Under George W. Bush, unemployment was up to 10.1 percent, and the stock market dropped no less than 46% while the collective household wealth of the nation dropped almost 20 trillion dollars. Twenty trillion dollars, and yet sixty percent of the people who voted for Trump believe the country was better off then than it was at the end of Obama’s presidency.
Let’s examine Trump’s statement that: “I inherited a mess.” Under Obama, a record 75 continuous months of job growth resulted in a 4.7 unemployment rate. The stock market soared under Obama above the 150 percent mark. Profits for corporations and small business were higher than they had ever been. And, the group so despised and ignored by the Republicans, the middle class, had, for the first time in forty years, seen their incomes rise. Whether or not he likes it, the fact remains that President Obama rescued an economy on the verge of collapse under his Republican predecessor and turned the economy around; the longest period of economic growth occurred because of Obama’s understanding of how economics works—and how to make it work for more people. Some mess!
I have heard numerous Trump supporters inform me how much they had suffered as a result of Obama’s eight years as president. Here are a few more facts on this for them to consider (not that they will):
- Both Chrysler and General Motors were on the verge of bankruptcy, which would have cost millions of jobs to be lost. Obama reacted by introducing an 80 billion dollar bailout to save the auto industry. Because of this, Chrysler, GM, and Ford (which had been experiencing similar economic disaster) were able to get on their feet. The entire amount was soon paid back.
- There was not a single terrorist attack on the United States during Obama’s presidency. Indeed, Osama bin Laden was killed not in Bush’s eight years, but within three years by the Obama administration.
- Obama’s presidency set a new record with 73 consecutive months of job growth in the private sector.
- Obama successfully reduced the federal deficit from 9.8 percent of GDP in 2009 to just 3.2 percent seven years later.
- Obama introduced successful legislation that ensured that credit card companies could no longer charge hidden fees or raise interest rates without first notifying their customers.
- Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize.
- He was the first president since Eisenhower to leave office without a tint of personal or political scandal.
- On the first day of his presidency, the Dow Jones Industrials closed at 7,949 points. By the end of his presidency, the Dow had nearly tripled.
- Obama installed Opening Doors in 2010, a program that has subsequently led to a 47 percent decline in the total number of homeless veterans.
- Obama, fighting against anti-science Republicans, was able to expand funding for stem cell research, which has already achieved startling success in areas such as cancer and treatment for spinal cord injuries.
- Perhaps most tellingly, and despite what Republican leaders would have us believe, welfare spending was dramatically reduced from 64 percent who received cash assistance in 1996, to a mere 24 percent under Obama.
Barack Obama halted a collapsing economy, put the nation back on track, and turned it into the longest period of growth on record. To paraphrase Patrick Henry, if this be suffering, make the most of it!
Add to all this the fact that Obama’s predecessor bears full responsibility for the catastrophe in Iraq, which caused the deaths of over a million people (making Bush responsible for more deaths than ISIS, Al Qaeda, and Assad combined), then any thinking person must ask why the media has become so complacent and unwilling to actually question anything the Republicans say or do. Once we recognize the role played by the media, everything else starts to fall in place; the Republicans rightly recognize that they can control the media by saying and doing anything they want and then screaming “foul” when it is, however hesitatingly reported.
There is another reason why the countless outlandish statements uttered by Trump and his cronies are generally ignored—money. Most of the major media voices have multi-million dollar salaries and they don’t want to jeopardize their jobs by reporting what is really going on in America. For example, The Daily Kos reports that George Stephanopoulos is estimated to earn at least fifteen million dollars annually. (RETLLL, Daily Kos, January 2, 2017) Diane Sawyer gets around 12 million annually, while Rachel Maddow, Megyn Kelly (until January 2017, of Fox News), Chris Matthews, Scott Pelley, Shepherd Smith, and Anderson Cooper all receive over five million dollars per annum. In addition to the outrageous salary it paid Megyn Kelly, Fox News paid Bill O’Reilly twenty million a year, while Matt Lauer, host of The Today Show receives a whopping twenty-five million dollars a year. The Daily Kos article cited above notes that: “The consequence of the above is that we have a fantastically out-of-touch commentariat, who are not personally affected by or have knowledge of much of the policies they are paid to cover and/or analyze. More crucially, this is a group of people (with some limited exceptions, including Ms. Maddow) who are not inclined to rock the boat. That is all the more the case when their salaries are directly tied to the whims and preferences of the advertising clients.” Clearly, the mainstream media has a vested interest in not questioning conservatives too closely. As the Daily Kos article noted: “When it comes to the Trump administration, it is not unfair to characterize our political coverage as ‘millionaires critiquing billionaires.’”
Getting back to Bush, his insistence that Saddam Hussein possessed “weapons of mass destruction,” although thoroughly debunked by just about every conceivable source, is still believed to be true by 68% of Trump supporters. They also still believe, despite all evidence to the contrary, that Obama was born in Kenya. Even Trump (now that the election is over), after earlier demanding Obama produce his birth certificate, has admitted that all this is total nonsense. As for Russia’s interference in helping Trump’s victory, and even though both the FBI and CIA are certain of it and the evidence conclusively proves it, a whopping 80% of Trump’s supporters (as of July, 2017) deny that this has happened, or that it is “fake news.” Yet another of Trump’s lies is his claim that he would have won the popular vote had it not been for all the illegal votes that were cast for Hillary Clinton. This also has been thoroughly investigated and completely debunked, yet 62% of Trump voters still believe it to be true.
The majority of voters who voted for Trump did so either because they were tired of “the system” and wanted someone allegedly outside the system to run things, or else simply because they hate and distrust Hillary Clinton. So how “dishonest” is she? Politifact, a Pulitzer prize-winning organization designed to test candidates’ statements and how they correspond with reality, has devised six categories to categorize their various statements. These are, in descending order of truthfulness: 1) True, 2) Mostly true, 3) Half true, half false 4) Mostly false, 5) False, and 6) Pants on fire (ridiculously false). Politifact’s roundup of the leading Democratic and Republican leaders was extremely telling: In all cases, the Democrats wound up significantly more truthful than the Republicans. As for Clinton, it was found that 71% of her statements fell into categories 1-3, while 29% fell into the other three categories. One percent of her statements were categorized as “pants on fire.” Compare this with Trump: 76% of his statements fell into the lower 3 categories, with not a single statement falling into category #1! Of course, the Republican response to this would be predictable: liberal bias, ignoring the fact that Politifact is an independent news source. But for conservatives, independent just means anti-Republican.
Incidentally, Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson has a beautiful twitter response to Trump’s campaign slogan: “We all want to Make America Great Again. But that won’t happen until we first Make America Smart Again.”
The people who voted for Trump are a mass of contradictions. For example, many of those who support Planned Parenthood voted for him. 22% of LGBT voters also supported him, undeterred from the fact that they risk losing all the advances their community has made in recent years. Trump’s views and his administration’s plans for these and other groups are not exactly a secret, so voters who ignore their own needs and vote for someone who threatens them can only be described as a mystery.
If the people who voted for Trump were aware of these and all the other objectively verifiable facts mentioned above and voted for him anyway, this proves they are living in an alternate reality in which facts mean nothing to them, only what they want to believe to be facts. This illustrates the power of Fox News and other right-wing media outlets to alter facts to suit their purposes; most right-wing conservatives have long bought into the myth of a liberal media and only listen to overtly biased conservative journalists. It also illustrates how the vast majority of Republicans still believe whatever they are told, as long as it fits in with their worldview.
At this point, we need to examine a newly-created term that puts everything in perspective. The term “alt-right” has been coined to refer to those subscribing to the extreme right wing branch of the Republican Party, as described above. But let’s be honest: Like their hijacking of the words “liberty” and “freedom” to appear more benign, the creators of the term ‘alt right’ should be honest and call the alt-right what it is: a white supremacist party. This is a fringe movement consisting of white racists, misogynists, neo-Nazis and others whose goal is to return the United States to an earlier time when blacks and women were irrelevant to the body politic and those not professing Christianity kept quiet about it. Once Trump was elected, these people appeared in force to preach their brand of hate. According to an article written by Thandisizwe Chimurenga (Daily Kos, November 30, 2016): “The shift came after a meeting of white nationalists inside the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington on Nov. 19, where members threw Nazi salutes and shouted, ‘Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory!’ The man they were saluting was the white nationalist who coined the term ‘alternative right,’ Richard Spencer, who had just given an anti-Semitic speech in which he quoted Nazi propaganda and called the United States a ‘white country.’ One white nationalist called it ‘the Heil Heard Around the World.’ Coverage of the Nazi salutes went viral, and public reaction was severe.”
Trump, when asked to comment on the increase in anti-Semitic violence, said: “sometimes it’s the reverse, to make people—or to make others—look bad.” This amazing statement was made on the same day that some of his top advisors said that the vandals might be Democrats. Trump and his party have no shame: blaming Democrats and even the Jews themselves for anti-Semitic terrorism.
Speaking of the rejuvenated Ku Klux Klan, they were so overjoyed at Trump’s victory that they announced they would sponsor a Trump victory parade the following month. Has Trump distanced himself from this group? No. What does that tell you about the man? Does he think the KKK will help him to “make America great again?”
Consider the words of some of the white supremacists once they heard of Trump’s victory. Neo-nazi leader David Duke exultantly crowed that: “This is one of the most exciting nights of my life…Our people played a HUGE role in electing Trump!” And Andrew Anglin, from the neo-Nazi website Daily Stormer (note the similarity between this site’s name and that of Der Sturmer, published by the Third Reich’s hate monger Julius Streicher), mixed fascism with (surprise!) fundamentalist Christianity when he celebrated by saying: “Our Glorious Leader has ascended to God Emperor. Make no mistake about it: we did this…The White race is back in the game.” Finally, when white supremacists met in Washington D.C. to celebrate the election of their proto-fuhrer, they raised their arms in the Nazi salute and screamed: “Heil Trump!”
Again, facts such as this are scarcely mentioned in traditional media outlets. This indicates just how low we as Americans have descended.
In the week following Trump’s election victory, there were no less than 437 recorded acts of hatred, bigotry, and harassment against minorities. 136 of these acts targeted immigrants, while blacks and LGBT persons were also victimized. 35 of these 51 incidents in California involved the swastika. Welcome to Trump’s America!
Interestingly, considering Trump’s campaign slogan, a case can be made that the last time we were great was during the Clinton years, when the economy was in the black and we had a balanced budget. This situation was then systematically destroyed by his successor, a man most historians are already beginning to call history’s worst president.
THE RUSSIAN SCANDAL
The next issue is another hot topic that continues to be conveniently ignored by those who voted for Trump: The Russian scandal and Trump’s relationship with Russian dictator Vladimir Putin. Trump has often complimented Putin, calling him a “real leader.” When told that Putin has murdered political enemies, Trump responded by saying that: “our country does plenty of killing also.” Media watchdog Daily Kos noted that Trump would look into “Russia’s annexation of the Crimean peninsula and questioned whether the United States should defend NATO allies who don’t pay their way. When Russian hackers stole a cache of emails in July from the Democratic National Committee’s servers, as security analysts have shown, Trump called on ‘Russia, if you’re listening, to hack some more.’”
There’s more: The CIA determined in December, 2016 (conveniently one month too late) that Russia had indeed intervened in the presidential election in order to help Trump win the presidency. As reported by the Daily Kos, “Hacking of both DNC and personal email was reportedly done by Russian state actors, who then provided the information to Wikileaks with the intent of harming Hillary Clinton’s chances and assisting Trump. This assessment follows President Obama’s announcement on Friday that he was ordering a full review of Russia’s attempts to interfere with the election.” (Mark Sumner, Daily Kos, December 10, 2016) Trump’s transition team, in response, denied everything and noted that: “it is time to move on and make America great again.” While Trump’s denial may constitute proof to Fox News, Breitbart and other right-wing news media sources, it should hardly convince any thinking person. The Los Angeles Times, had as its heading: “Dissent in GOP grows over Russia Allegations.” (Sarah D. Wire, Los Angeles Times, December 12, 2016) The article noted: “In a rare joint statement Sunday, four high-profile Republican and Democratic senators called for a government investigation into the matter and urged colleagues not to allow the issue to become partisan.” Rare indeed! In fact, virtually non-existent once Trump became president.
We have already noted Jeff Sessions lies concerning the Russian scandal. Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, is another player in all this. He attended a meeting with Russia’s ambassador, but the White House failed to mention this at all—until the New Yorker exposed the story. Noting this, Los Angeles Times reporter Doyle McManus asked of his readers: “See a pattern? False or misleading denials, followed by revelations in the media, followed by attempts to explain the denials away—followed by angry tweets from the president blaming it all on the media, the Democrats, and leaks.” (Doyle McManus, LA Times, March 5, 2017) McManus also pointedly asks: “When U.S. intelligence agencies reported that Russia was meddling in the presidential election, why did Trump attack the CIA and defend Putin?” And: “Were all those conversations with Russia innocent chats about foreign policy or evidence of collusion?”
Kushner, the top advisor in the White House (nepotism on the grandest scale), tried to establish secret communications with a foreign country known to be hostile to the United States. This was done without congressional oversight, which makes it treason. Had someone in an earlier White House staff engaged in similar activities, they would have been arrested and put on trial, even if that person had security clearance. Had this occurred during Obama’s presidency, the Republicans would have screamed for his impeachment.
The nepotism became even more obvious when, on July 11, 2017, it was revealed that Donald Trump Jr. knew that Moscow was trying to assist in the 2016 presidential campaign. Trump Jr.’s emails, released on that date, show that he met with Natalia Veselnitskaya, a Russian lawyer who said that she possessed “official documents and information” that could be of help to Trump Sr. The Loa Angeles Times lead story the following day noted: “Her information was ‘part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump,’ according to the emails.” (Los Angeles Times, July 12, 2017) In true Trumpian fashion, Jr. first insisted that the meeting was about helping Russian orphans. What does this say about his honesty, or lack thereof? At any rate, the key point in this new revelation is that: “The messages showed that top campaign officials were eager to receive the information, even after being told that it came from a foreign government.” In short, the messages are proof positive that there is: “Concrete evidence of contacts between Russians and the top levels of Trump’s enterprise and the clearest indication that people close to Trump were aware of a Russian desire to assist his campaign.” Another article the same day had as its headline: “At last, the smoking gun on Trump-Russia.” (Doyle McManus, Los Angeles Times, July 12, 2017) Trump Sr. will no doubt continue to call the investigation into this scandal a “witch hunt.” But, whether he and his administration like it or not, the American people want to know exactly what happened. Our democracy depends on it.
Certain Democrats have betrayed their party and the people of the United States by taking campaign money from Kushner. Rootstrikers discusses this: “Sen. Cory Booker, a rising star in the Democratic Party with ambitions for 2020, recently went on ‘Meet the Press, saying it was ‘too soon’ to revoke Jared Kushner’s security clearance, even after it was discovered he worked to create a secret channel of communication with the Russian government. Elected Democrats claim to be part of the ‘resistance,’ and have made a lot of promises to their constituents about holding Trump to account and getting to the bottom of the endless stream of corruption and conflicts of interest coming out of the White House. But several elected Democrats have taken campaign money from Jared Kushner, Trump’s most trusted adviser, and his wife, Ivanka Trump. Sen. Booker alone has taken $23,400 from them. And Booker is not the only one. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) took $4,000 from Jared Kushner. Booker’s fellow New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez also took money from Kushner.” (Carli Stevenson, Rootstrikers, June 2, 2017) Clearly, political cronyism is not restricted to the Republicans!
Despite his being knee-deep in the Russian scandal, Kushner continues to receive top-security information every day. Until the Russian scandal investigation runs its course, this man should not be in a position to receive top secret national security information.
Christopher Wray, the newly-confirmed director of the FBI, has already noted that the investigation is not a witch hunt. He also said on the first day of his confirmation hearings that, not only did he disagree with Trump on several aspects of the investigation, he would not: “bow to pressure from anyone to quash the inquiry—even the president.” (Joseph Tanfani, Los Angeles Times, July 13, 2017. Elaborating on this, he said: “There is not a person on the planet whose lobbying or influence could cause me to drop a meritorious and properly predicated investigation.” He was unanimously confirmed on July 20.
One of the few things Trump and Obama had in common is their determination to continue the war on whistle-blowers which has been going on for a decade now. The stakes are higher for Trump than for Obama, given his multitudinous lies and outright scorn for legitimate facts. Thus, secrecy is even more important for Trump than for his predecessor. The much-maligned whistle-blowers are the ones who are informing the public about governmental waste, fraud, and corruption in government. The best-known incident in recent months has been the case of Chelsea Manning who was released from prison on May 17, 2017 after having endured years of cruel treatment that has been described as “cruel, inhuman, and degrading” by the United Nations. Her crime? She reported on U.S. actions during the Iraq war. For this, not only was she imprisoned, she was degraded, denied access to medical care and lawyers, and even attempted suicide. This is to Obama’s lasting shame, but rest assured this type of treatment will continue and expand under Donald Trump.
Contrary to what the government would have us believe, whistle blowers are an important part of our democracy; many big-name trial attorneys support them, and their voices, particularly in this troublesome time, need to be heard. The Russian scandal is potentially the biggest ever to confront a sitting administration, and whistle-blowers may play a crucial role in arriving at the truth.
For now, however, anyone daring to blow the whistle and expose any discomforting (for the administration) facts will be dealt with harshly. For example, Sierra Rise informs us that: “An Interior Department whistleblower has filed a complaint claiming that he was reassigned after speaking out about the impacts of climate change on Alaska Native communities. He was transferred to the office that collects fossil fuel royalty payments. He is but one of approximately 50 top managers who have been suddenly reassigned to new jobs by the Interior Department…Joel Clement, the whistleblower, is a scientist who used to head the agency’s Office of Policy Analysis. He was one of the leading climate policy experts in the government. Dozens of his colleagues have been similarly affected, including leaders in the National Park Service, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management, and Fish and Wildlife Service. Each are members of the high-level Senior Executive Service. But while it is legal to reassign these executives, that cannot be done in retaliation or to coerce employees to quit. (Secretary) Zinke himself admitted that he would use reassignments to cut the department’s workforce.” (Sierra Rise, July 28, 2017) The administration’s agenda is quite clear: censor anything that comes up that might support the fact that climate change is real.
It strikes me as somewhat amusing the incompetence displayed by the White House concerning this scandal. Trump and his colleagues simply cannot seem to agree on how to keep their stories consistent with each other. That is one of the main reasons why this scandal refuses to go away. Trump of course does not react with each new revelation as a seasoned politician should react: to get the story straight, give a quick explanation, apologize and move on. Had he done this, the Russian scandal would not be on the front page of most major newspapers virtually every day. Instead, Trump screams “fake news” and calls the scandal a “witch hunt.” Trump’s ignorance of how politics works makes him unable to recognize that mere bluster will not get him out of the hot water he finds himself in.
The Daily Kos noted: “During the campaign, Donald Trump implored the Russians to hack and make public Hillary Clinton’s presumed missing emails. That the Russians were already hacking and releasing information to damage Hillary’s campaign and that Trump’s request was made publicly during a campaign rally does not diminish the fact that he was asking a foreign nation with which we have serious conflicting interests to take action to undermine American electoral processes is tantamount to treason. To invite a foreign nation to undermine our electoral processes is a violation of the sanctity and sovereignty of the US. Is that not treason?…When Trump invited the participation of a foreign power in our election, it was treason. When he obstructs and disparages investigation into hacking by the foreign power that put him in office, that too is treason. And we must call it that.” (Woodworker, Daily Kos, January 7, 2017)
The scandal has taken on epic proportions which Trump can no longer wave off as irrelevant. According to the Daily Kos: “That massive, tangled web includes Trump’s financial connections to oligarchs, Manafort’s tie to pro-Russian forces in Ukraine, Wilbur Ross’s entanglement in the Bank of Cyprus, Rex Tillerson and Carter Page’s ties to Rosneft, everybody chatting with Sergey Kislyak … and that little item where the Russians hacked into servers during the election, stole emails, and handed them over to “I love Wikileaks.” Enough shoes have already dropped in this story to open a Payless, and it’s just getting started.” (Mark Sumner, Daily Kos, March 9, 2017)
One rarely reported incident that occurred in February 2017 seems to have passed under the radar not only of people investigating the scandal, but of the major media outlets and thus, of the general public: A law was passed on July 27, 2016 that required companies to disclose any payments they had made in the previous fiscal year to foreign governments related to the commercial use of oil, natural gas, or minerals. This was an eminently practical rule that was created to let the American people know where those companies were drilling, and also who they were paying for the privilege of drilling. Supporters correctly said that this rule was essential for national security, but opponents said it was too bureaucratic and somehow sacrificed American jobs. Less than one month into Trump’s administration, on February 12, 2017, the law was rescinded. Given the fact that the Russian investigation was just starting to heat up, the timing is more than coincidental; neither Trump or any major fossil fuel business leader wants John Q. Public to know they are making secret deals with countries (like Russia) who are deemed to be enemies of the United States.
We must recognize the Russian scandal for what it is. More and more evidence is coming in every day showing that the 2016 presidential election was a fixed affair, due to the treasonous interference of the administration’s friends and allies in Russia. If there is even a smattering of truth in what is coming out, then Trump is an illegal president and we need to have a new election. One thing for sure: if Trump and Hillary Clinton ran against each other right now (April, 2017), the results would be a landslide for Clinton.
Where is the outrage? And where was the FBI while all this was going on? After meeting with FBI Director James Comey in January 2017, Congressional Democrats were extremely frustrated. The main reason, according to an article in the Daily Kos, is that: “According to a new exclusive report in the UK’s Independent newspaper, former MI6 agent Christopher Steele became so alarmed at the national security threat Donald Trump’s Russian ties posed to the US and the UK, he turned over copies of his findings to both British and American intelligence way back in July and continued working on the case without pay even after the election in November.” (kat68, Daily Kos, January 13, 2017) The article goes on to say: “But after months of inaction, the report says…’Mr Steele became increasingly frustrated that the FBI was failing to take action on the intelligence from others as well as him. He came to believe there was a cover-up, that a cabal within the Bureau blocked a thorough inquiry into Mr. Trump, focusing instead on the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails.’” There was no action taken by the FBI, which was entirely focused on gleaning information on Hillary Clinton’s alleged email scandal. At this point, John McCain, who had been hearing reports about Trump’s ties to the Kremlin, discussed the issue with Sir Andrew Wood, a man who has served as British ambassador to Russia and has a wide grasp of Russian politics, and asked him about Steele. Wood assured McCain that Steele was a man of unimpeachable character and professionalism. McCain, showing an integrity lacking in most of today’s Republicans, then obtained a dossier written by Steele and personally delivered it to Comey. The result? No action.
Despite his willingness to play footsies with Putin, who seems to have had a direct hand in the effort to sabotage the election, Trump seems equally determined to aggravate China, as evidenced by his telephone call to Tsai Ying-wen, the president of Taiwan. Taiwan and the United States severed their diplomatic relations back in 1979, so this is sure to infuriate China which has regarded Taiwan with disdain since the post World War II period. This was shortly followed by a rant about the U.S. trade deal with China. These are but two more examples of Trump’s ignorance and incompetence in foreign affairs. Daily Kos summarized this as follows: “In short, China could wreak havoc if they called in our debt. Russia is a key trade partner with China. Who will the Russians stand with? And bashing on China’s controversial South China Sea bases? On Twitter? Donald Trump is pushing into uncharted and very dangerous waters with his Twitter account. He may do more than wreck the U.S. economy. He may drag us into full-scale military confrontation.” (Jen Hayden, Daily Kos, December 4, 2016) Trump and his team are talking about a trade war with China. This would be an ill-advised move, to say the least; China has promised that if such a war takes place, they will move forward in numerous ways that could hurt Trump’s biggest supporters. They would cancel orders from Boeing Co. aircraft, which would hurt U.S. shareholders, putting pressure on Trump’s administration. They would also block U.S. exports such as soybeans, putting Republican Senators in a difficult position since their constituents do not have a large manufacturing base. Finally and perhaps most significantly, China could exert pressure on General Motors and other U.S. multinational corporations which rely on China as their largest sales market. Clearly, China is not going to back down from Trump’s threats, and if they implement these and other strategies, the consequences will indeed be drastic. As noted by the Daily Kos: “The ever Republican farmers who are already suffering low crop prices, are about to learn the lesson that willful ignorance of a candidate and an entire party is going to have a high price. The same will hold for the white working class in those Midwestern states that ignored the racism, the threats on religion and millions of people, the suffering to millions of others they knew was coming, and instead voted for a ‘change,’ wink wink, nudge nudge.” (Pollwatcher, Daily Kos, December 22, 2016)
On March 1, 2017, it was revealed that Attorney General Jeff Sessions had spoken with the Russian Ambassador on at least two occasions during the presidential campaign. During his confirmation hearing, Sessions, under oath to the Senate Judiciary Committee, denied that he had spoken with anyone in Russia during the campaign. There is no way of calling him anything but a liar. Sierra Rise noted: “Here is where we are: the U.S. intelligence community has concluded that a hostile foreign government hacked American institutions and leaked information designed to boost its preferred presidential candidate.” (Sierra Rise, March 2, 2017) The article concluded by noting: “Russia is a classic case of what happens when a fossil fuel oligarchy combines with authoritarian politics. As democracy withers, civil rights and environmental protections collapse.” Anyone who thinks that the same cannot happen here is suffering from delusions on a monumental scale. Although due to public pressure Sessions eventually recused himself from investigations into the scandal, the voices demanding his resignation continue to be heard. Here is what Sessions said on March 2, 2017: “I have now decided to recuse myself from any existing or future investigations of any matter relating in any way to the campaigns for president of the United States.” But then, two months later, he betrayed his promise and recommended that Trump fire James Comey, who was investigating the Trump’s campaign dealings with Russia. Sessions lied. For that reason alone, he should have either resigned or been fired. And, in July 2017 Trump publicly berated Sessions not for his lie, but for his recusing himself from the investigation!
The committee is itself to blame for asking questions that enabled Sessions to waffle and wiggle. It is singularly amazing that none of the lawyer members among them seemed to realize the legal errors that had been made. Committee members should have asked questions that Sessions could not refuse to answer by claiming that he was protecting theTrump’s right to claim executive privilege. When executive privilege is claimed, it covers only whether a given topic or communication had occurred. Had Sessions been asked a simple yes or no question as to whether or not he had discussed an issue with Trump on a specific topic, and Sessions answered in the affirmative, that would have allowed the committee to ask the president whether he would invoke executive privilege on that particular discussion. In other words, all the committee had to do was to ask Sessions simple yes-or-no type questions, which Sessions would legally be required to answer. This is why the committee dropped the ball when it had an ideal opportunity to take the issue directly to the White House. Any competent attorney would know this. Are there no lawyers in Congress? Or are they simply determined not to delve to deeply into the scandal?
Clearly, the entire situation, in all its multi-faceted dimensions, is a scandal of immense proportions, one that makes Watergate look like a candy store break-in by a ten year old diabetic. And, even though a few honest journalists are working on following the stories to their conclusion, the American public in general seems to be greeting these scandals with a resounding yawn. Again, “it’s just Donald being Donald.” Apparently, they also think it’s “just his appointees being his appointees.” No, their faith in Trump, just like their faith in god, will never be dissuaded by the facts.
As we have seen, Trump has already shown himself guilty of numerous impeachable offenses. On February 19, 2017, less than a month after Trump’s inauguration, Congressman Jerrold Nadler from New York introduced a Resolution of Inquiry which would require the Department of Justice to supply the House of Representatives with all relevant material pertaining to Trump and his associates’ conflicts of interest, ties with Russia, ethical violations (including the Emoluments Clause). So even in February 2017 the lies, evasions, scandals, and ethical violations were already serious and obvious enough to warrant an independent investigation. Nothing of a similar nature has ever been instigated against a new administration anywhere near this early in their term.
What is the Republican majority in Congress doing about it? Nothing, of course. And the Democrats? Only a few seem willing to stand up for America and call this corrupt administration to task. Back in Nixon’s day, obvious corruption was hard for most Republicans to accept, but today, they have shown time and again that they are more than willing to accept Trump’s corruption as business as usual and close ranks behind him. It will be up to the American people to demand honesty from this eminently corrupt and evil man; profiting from your position as president while you are president is clearly an impeachable offense. No president in history has been as blatantly dishonest in mixing the business of the country with his own personal business affairs.
Donald Trump has also, by his nomination of Neil Gorsuch, proven that he will make every attempt to pack the Supreme Court with reactionary Republicans who are sympathetic to his views and plans, no matter how radical and unconstitutional they may be. Gorsuch was far from the only man considered to join the court: two of the most extreme jurists in the country were also touted by National Review as potential successors to the court; they may well be future nominees given the advanced age of several current members. These choices, if approved, could reign in devastation that will long survive Trump’s presidency. One of the favored choices, William Pryor, has said that the federal government: “should not be in the business of public education nor the control of street crime.” (Meteor Blades, Daily Kos, November 22, 2016) The Kos article also noted that Pryor “has a history of official support for states’ rights and an extremist view of federalism that several Supreme Court rulings have shot down.” He is on record as having attacked the Voting Rights Act, the Americans With Disabilities Act, as well as various environmental protection laws. The other possible appointee, Diane Sykes, has written various dissents which always protect business interests at the expense of consumers and victims of discrimination. Should defects be found in their products, Sykes has argued that that there should be limits on corporate liabilities (yet another example of how the first three words of the Constitution, “We the people” will, under Trump, become meaningless verbiage). The Kos article quoted above also noted: “She took the outrageous view that a prosecutor should be legally shielded from a claim that he fabricated evidence that put a wrongly convicted man in prison for 17 years. She argued that a federal law barring ownership of firearms by people convicted of domestic violence is unconstitutional. All the other 10 justices on the 7th Circuit said otherwise.” And: “She was also the sole dissenter on the Wisconsin Supreme Court when it ruled that evidence collected during the interrogation of a person who was not issued a Miranda warning must be excluded from trial.”
William Pryor and Diane Sykes: two of the most rabid legal extremists in the country may yet wind up on the Supreme Court in the near future, where they will join Gorsuch and continue their assaults on anyone who doesn’t fit their pre-packaged idea of what it means to be an American. They, and people of their ilk, are the real un-Americans.
The infamous “nuclear option” initiated by Mitch McConnell is not surprising, given that Republicans, when facing a losing proposition, have become notorious for conveniently changing the rules to their advantage. A mere five conservative Supreme Court judges stole the 2000 presidential election for George W. Bush by halting the recount of the Florida ballots that would in all likelihood have given the presidency to Al Gore. The same Republican politicians who had been screaming about “activist judges” suddenly became silent when the activist judges were conservative.
If Neil Gorsuch had any moral scruples at all, he would have refused the scandalous nomination. By accepting it, he proved himself to be nothing more than another shill for the Republican party. Anyone who thinks he will be an impartial judge who considers each case on its own terms is suffering from severe delusional tendencies.
I must also note the hypocrisy of many Christian fundamentalists, those Trump supporters who are always claiming to support “family values.” The same people who would have screamed to the heavens if a Democrat degraded women as Trump has repeatedly done are all too willing to let him get away with his disgraceful misogynist remarks. The same Christians who would never dream of allowing a monogamous gay or lesbian into their congregation ignore the pedophiles and other criminal behavior of so many of their religious leaders. Christian evangelicals obviously have no problem electing a man who gropes and assaults women and then boasts about getting away with it, has been divorced not once but three times, and who has proven himself to be as crude as they come, since 81% of them voted for him. But by doing so, they have lost all moral credibility, if they ever had it in the first place. But those of no faith or belonging to a liberal religious group are also guilty, albeit less so, as 26% of them voted for Trump. Clearly, being non-religious or moderately religious does not automatically make one rational.
THE ROLE OF CHRISTIAN FUNDAMENTALISM
At this point, we will examine fundamentalist religion and the role it is playing in the current political scene. When we refer to a “religious fundamentalist,” we are referring to a person who interprets their alleged “holy book” literally and believes it to be without error of any kind. While these people have always been around, today they are in the seats of power in Washington. How did this regression of morality and objective thinking come about? A little objective history provides the answer.
The Enlightenment marked the beginning of a new era, one in which people began to take the first tentative steps away from a literal interpretation of scripture. The benefits of science and the scientific method became obvious to all but a few cloistered clergymen. The United States of America was founded by a group of men inspired by John Locke and other leading thinkers of the Enlightenment. The first three words of the United States Constitution were the most radical ever penned by a government up to that time: We the People. Not we, the Christian people, or we the subjects of the king, or we the servants of god, or anything else. These three words were truly revolutionary in that they meant that, for the first time, laws were being put into place not by some arbitrary political or religious authority, but by the people themselves. Individual rights became the cornerstone of the New American Republic. For the first time, people were free to support any religion, or no religion, as their conscience dictates.
Naturally, the forces of conservatism fought progress and human rights at every turn; they felt they were losing the ideological war. As liberal reforms began to sweep over much of Europe in the nineteenth century, the Catholic church increasingly felt itself to be more and more isolated. This was the inevitable result of the church’s own stances. For example, in the 1820s Pope Leo XII decreed that vaccination against smallpox was against the will of god. And after Italian independence was achieved and the Papal States were lost, Pope Pius IX petulantly retreated to the Vatican, never to emerge for the last eight years of his pontificate.
Religious fundamentalism received a rejuvenation of sorts with the 1909 publication of a twelve volume series entitled The Fundamentals which enjoyed great popularity during the First World War due to its imagined association of religious fundamentalism with patriotism, an association that was soon latched onto by the Republican party. To this day, the Republican party continues to be the party of religious fundamentalism and imposing those views on all Americans continues to be a cornerstone of its agenda.
During the First World War, a blatantly racist movie entitled The Birth of a Nation was shown for the first time. This movie glorified the Ku Klux Klan, which had been dormant for about twenty years prior to this time. From this time onward, the KKK emphasized its devotion to Christianity, specifically the fundamentalist interpretation of Christianity. This is a crucial point if we are to understand today’s political climate: Without the emphasis of fundamentalist Christianity, the KKK would never have been as huge as it was in the years following World War One. The association between the KKK, fundamentalist Christianity, and the Republican party continues to this day. To be sure, this will be viewed as an extremely controversial statement. What is the evidence that today’s Republicans tend to be both religious fundamentalists as well as Nazi sympathizers?
While lynchings against blacks, Jews, Catholics and others have mercifully disappeared from the scene, today’s Republicans continue the hate-filled tradition of demonizing anyone that is not a fundamentalist Christian, or else dares to question their agenda in any way. Their enemies today include the LGBT community, the Democratic party, liberalism in any form, secularism, and just about anyone else they view as a threat to their domination of the political scene. Allow me illustrate the connections between the KKK and today’s Republican party by quoting myself in an article I wrote entitled Fundamentalism, the Titanic, and the KKK(available in its entirety on my blog): “both claim to be super patriots and ardently wave the flag at every opportunity. Both promote a historically false view of our nation’s founding. Both have displayed hostility toward science, in particular biological evolution. Both are hostile toward intellectuals, the media, and the motion picture industry. Both are downright vitriolic in their condemnation of any views other than their own. Both claim to be vigorous upholders of ‘traditional values’ which always means their values. Tellingly, both have survived numerous scandals and emerged unscathed due to their favorable treatment by the media they claim discriminates against them.”
Most significantly of all, today’s Republicans and their Ku Klux Klan predecessors of the 1920s were/are fundamentalist Christians to the core. Can any Republican leader today argue with the Klan Creed which states ‘I believe in God and in the tenets of the Christian religion and that a godless nation cannot long prosper?’ Today’s Republicans, like their Klan predecessors, are innately Calvinistic and seek to impose their version of a ‘Christian Nation’ on the entire United States. Both want mandatory school prayer, legislation making abortion a crime and other social issues associated with fundamentalist Christianity. In other words, both the Klan and the Republican party want a Christian theocracy.
Senator Jesse Helms, who died in 2008, was an unapologetic racist and hate monger who was elected time and again to the United States Senate. Helms never renounced his segregationist views, and at his death was praised by President George W. Bush as a ‘patriot,’ a sentiment shared by numerous Republican demagogues and pundits such as Patric Buchanan. No leading Republican spoke a word against Helms or condemned his despicable views and congressional record. It is a telling indictment of today’s Radical Republicans that a thoroughly repugnant man such as Jesse Helms, rather than being universally condemned as the national disgrace he was, instead is viewed by them in a positive light.
Today’s Republicans would be right at home as members of the 1920s Ku Klux Klan.
Noam Chomsky was interviewed on Democracy Now in May, 2016 by Amy Goodman and had this to say about today’s Republican Party: “…The fact of the matter is that today’s Republican Party qualify as candidates for the most dangerous organization in human history. Literally.” (Walter Einenkel, Daily Kos, April 26, 2017) Naturally, given Chomsky’s fame as an author, political commentator, linguist, and social critic, this comment drew a lot of attention. Ms. Goodman interviewed Chomsky again on April 24, 2017. Chomsky opined: “…Has there ever been an organization in human history that is dedicated, with such commitment, to the destruction of organized human life on Earth? Not that I’m aware of. Is the Republican organization—I hesitate to call it a party—committed to that? Overwhelmingly. There isn’t even any question about it. Take a look at the last primary campaign—plenty of publicity, very little comment on the most significant fact. Every single candidate either denied that what is happening is happening—namely, serious move towards environmental catastrophe—or there were a couple of moderates, so-called—Jeb Bush, who said, ‘Maybe it’s happening. We really don’t know. But it doesn’t matter, because fracking is working fine, so we can get more fossil fuels.’ Then there was the guy who was called the adult in the room, John Kasich, the one person who said, ‘Yes, it’s true. Global warming’s going on. But it doesn’t matter.’ He’s the governor of Ohio. ‘In Ohio, we’re going to go on using coal for energy, and we’re not going to apologize for it.’ So that’s 100 percent commitment to racing towards disaster.” All this of course ties in with Republican infatuation with fundamentalist religious belief: We are free to destroy the planet, because after all, Jesus is coming soon and will save us. Until we as a nation are mature enough and bold enough to reject this type of thinking, particularly from our politicians, the possibility of an Armageddon that Republicans so ardently seek to come about will increase by the day. Unfortunately for them, if they are successful in making it come about, all that will happen will be death and destruction—for them, and for everyone else. Nobody is going to magically descend from the heavens to save us from our own excesses.
As further evidence of the threat posed by fundamentalist religious beliefs, I should also point out some of the countless atrocities being committed in these United States by fundamentalist Christians. Countless murders have occurred by devout believers. For example, on November 14, 1998, nine year old Matthew Louis Cecchi was brutally murdered in a public camping area by a teenager named Brandon Wilson who said at his trial that god had told him to kill the boy. Seven year old Aaren Marie Dunn was murdered on June 26, 2000 by her father who then congratulated himself, thinking he had “saved” his town by killing his daughter, who he described as “the devil.” In 2001, Andrea Yates confessed to drowning her five children in order to save them from hell. On June 22, 2007, police found the murdered bodies of Nancy and Daniel Benoit with a bible placed next to the corpses. Two years later, 13 year old Christian Choate was locked in a cage for over a year, starved and beaten until he finally succumbed to his injuries. His body was purple and he weighed less than fifty pounds. His father had locked him up in the cage with nothing except a bible.
Perhaps faith healing is the best illustration of the sickening situation fundamentalist religion has put us in. As a stark illustration how morally backwards we are as a country, let me point out that in many states, faith healing is considered a legitimate form of “treatment” for illness. This ridiculous notion has come about for one reason and one reason only: legislators fear the wrath of Christian fundamentalists should they dare to question the alleged merits of faith healing. At present, there are at least four states that give religious groups great leeway from criminal prosecution and civil liability for children’s deaths resulting from medical neglect. As a direct result of this unbelievably evil legislation, countless children have died because their parents refused to provide them with the care they needed to treat their illnesses. Faith healers are thus accessories to murder; their refusal to admit that illness exists is more than a form of child abuse, it is a capital crime, a stupid dark age notion that should have died out centuries ago. Until legislators have the courage to stand up to these evil people who are allowing their children to die rather than giving them the medical attention they need, these inhuman crimes will continue.
The Moral Atheist asks: “Can politicians really be so dumb as to treat faith healing legislatively as actual healthcare? Yes, they can. And that goes for both Democrats and Republicans and courts high and low.” (MarieAlena Castle, The Moral Atheist, July—August, 2017) This article included a sad photo of a child with a tumor pushing her eyeball out. Her parents, despite the evidence in front of their eyes, steadfastly refused to provide her with medical care. Fortunately, in this case, someone called Child Protection Services. The same article discussed the results of a Google search for information about faith healing: “Site after site suggests endless agonizing over how to accommodate the religious beliefs or how to balance the beliefs against the need to protect children. The overall assumption is that there is a major dilemma here. What dilemma??!! There is none. This is the simplest no-brainer issue imaginable! You simply do not pass laws that allow parents to deprive children of real medical care or beat them or starve them or otherwise mistreat them just to satisfy some absurd religious belief.” The article also discussed one case that went to court where a legislator, after hearing a deponent’s professional account of the belief system that gives rise to all this, accused her of “bashing” religion! Another legislator told MarieAlena Castle: “Well, doctors don’t cure everyone either.” Castle notes: “No, but their track record sure beats a system that denies illness exists!” She also points out that, of the fifty states in our union, only one, Nebraska, has never had a law on its books defending faith healing. And, it was an atheist, state senator Ernie Chambers, who many years ago ensured that such laws would never come about.
It is a sad state of affairs when both liberals and conservatives are more concerned with protecting parents’ religious “freedom” than they are with protecting children.
Another alarming fact is that, although female genital mutilation has been a federal crime in the United States for 21 years, a recent case in Detroit illustrates again the immoral stance of the Christian theocrats. It was actually argued that banning this barbaric practice may somehow violate a parent’s “religious freedom.” It was also argued that doctors who perform this mutilation should be exempt from prosecution. Again, people who argue in this way simply do not understand what religious freedom means: It does not mean the freedom to hurt someone else in the name of your religion. They also clearly do not understand what morality is. The same rationalizations being used to defend faith healing are just as false when it comes to FGM.
Closely related to this issue is the question of immunization. Many parents refuse to immunize their children from common childhood diseases—which threatens their health and he health of other children they come into contact with. All this is proof positive that when religion enters the equation, morality slips out the door. Faith can kill—it is high time we as a society recognize this simple fact.
It all boils down to belief in the Bible for fundamentalist Christians and their theocratic leaders. They are the ultimate cherry pickers: finding nice little passages that they think supports their beliefs, and ignoring everything else. Yet look at way the (probably fictitious) Jesus is presented: He taught that slaves should be whipped (Luke 12:46-48). He taught that devils and sin were caused illness (John 5:11-14; Matthew 9:6, and Luke 8:2). He told anyone wishing to follow him that they should hate their families (Luke 14:26). This is not the place for an elaborate expose of the Bible; interested readers may consult my blog <nonbeliever.me> for further reading on this subject.
That being said, there is one Bible verse which I wholeheartedly endorse. This is Proverbs 14:15, which says: “The simple believe anything, but the prudent give thought to their steps.”
Examples such as this can be multiplied indefinitely; across the globe, the most inhumane treatment of human beings by other humans often has devout religious belief underlying their actions. So much for the notion that religion somehow makes people behave morally. Until believers are able to come up with examples such as those listed above in which atheists and other freethinkers have committed similar atrocities, the conclusion that it is religion, rather than freethinking, which is immoral is the only possible conclusion to arrive at.
This of course does not mean that all religious fundamentalists are potential murderers. However, an examination of our prisons does shed some interesting light on the matter. Records show that the highest percentage of those incarcerated tend to be religious fundamentalists, even though their numbers in the general population tend to hover at around twenty percent. At the same time, those professing no religious belief constitute less than one percent of the prison population, a most discomforting fact for those that claim religion is essential for morality. In other words, the overall trend seems to be that, the more devoutly religious a person tends to be, the more likely he or she will commit a crime that will land them in prison.
The 2016 party platform for the Texas Republican party, while it obviously does not represent all fundamentalists in the country, does give us an inkling of what they are up to. While this is not the place to discuss their platform at length, a couple of things are of particular interest. Anti-abortion fanaticism is, predictably, a core component; they want to eliminate all public funding for fetal tissue research and, of course, Planned Parenthood. They also want to be able to prosecute people who injure or kill the unborn. With regard to education, they want the U.S. Department of Education abolished. As for what is actually taught in school, their standards do not list general science, biology, physics, or chemistry; they do not even consider science to be a curricular area. Most of the rest of the platform is very similar to what the Republican party is also attempting to accomplish. Religious fundamentalism is the foundational ideology of both.
It should also be mentioned the hypocrisy of religious fundamentalists who support Trump, who has been married three times, has openly committed adultery and who has stated that he desires to grope women’s genitals. Imagine their uproar if a Democratic candidate had done the same! Clearly, there is a double standard at work here. Church and State pointed it out: “Religious Right activists, who are usually quick to judge the behavior of others, suddenly adopted moral relativism. One poll showed 72 percent of white evangelicals agreeing that an elected official who commits an immoral act in his/her personal life can still behave ethically and fulfill professional duties. As recently as 2011, that figure was only 30 percent.” (Rob Boston, Church and State, December, 2016) The difference, of course, is that Obama was president in 2011.
It is these same religious fundamentalists who are at the forefront of the new Christian Nationalism, and it is they who are the most rabid defenders of Trump and Christian Dominionism. Their insane ravings echo the pre-rationalist Christian Dark Ages in their vehemence. They claim that those opposing Trump are under the spell of Satan. Trump’s enemies are “demons” because they are defying “God’s plan” for the United States. The Daily Kos noted: “One of the religious right’s most prominent voices, Lance Wallnau, recently urged his followers to join him in prayer so Trump would have the strength to destroy his enemies. Wallnau is one of the leading members of the New Apostolic Reformation, the overtly fascist offshoot of the religious right that seeks to bring about the Second Coming by taking over the world.” (Christian Dem in NC, Daily Kos, March 12, 2017)
THE FOLLIES OF TRUMPCARE
One of the key agenda items on Donald Trump’s campaign platform was his intention to replace the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) with one more suitable to Republican ideals. Naturally, Trump has no idea of how to do this: he left it to Senate Republicans to craft and implement a replacement. From the beginning, they faced the stiffest opposition, most notably from the American public who clearly were not happy about any plans they were able to come up with. By late July 2017, the entire edifice had collapsed in a heap around them. As I write this, Republicans are in complete disarray as to what to do.
Ironically, many of the people who voted for Trump stand to suffer the most under “Trumpcare.”, no matter what form, if any, it ultimately takes. Each of the Trumpcare plans has ignored older and lower income Americans, particularly in rural areas, those same areas that tended to vote for him. These folks generally do not make enough money to afford already expensive health insurance which, under the Republican plan, would be even more costly. Ironically, as the Daily Kos noted: “The voters hit the hardest—eligible for at least $5,000 less in tax credits under the Republican plan—supported Mr. Trump by a margin of 59 percent to 36 percent.” (Kerry Eleveld, Daily Kos, March 10, 2017) After analyzing county voting and tax credit data, the Los Angeles Times agreed, noting: “Among those hit the hardest under the current House bill are 60 year olds with annual incomes of $30,000. In nearly 1500 counties nationwide, such a person stands to lose more than $6,000 a year in federal insurance subsidies. Ninety percent of those counties backed Trump, the analysis shows.” (Noah N. Levey, Los Angeles Times, March 12, 2017) The article notes that: “The Times analysis is based on county election results compiled by the Associated Press and a report by the nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation of the projected value of insurance subsidies in 2020 under current law and under House Republicans’ proposed alternative.” The bottom line is that countless numbers of people in rural areas of swing states are going to be in for a big surprise when they find themselves paying thousands of dollars more for insurance under the new plan.
Keep in mind that one of Trump’s main campaign promises was that he would replace Obamacare with a plan that would benefit all Americans. Should some version of Trumpcare ultimately come to pass, it will be extremely interesting to see if the people who supported Trump and will be suffering the most under the new plan still support him. For sure, it will be hard to blame the Democrats this time around! Especially when you consider the fact that, in trying to come up with a replacement for Obamacare, the Republicans, increasingly frustrated, wrote their final alternative version in secret, failing to consult any Democrats, affected individuals, patients, budget or other outside experts, or businesses. There were no outside public hearings of any kind. While this is a sure fire formula for disaster (which is exactly what happened), it is standard operating procedure for Republicans, especially when they are in the majority. This has been demonstrated over and over again in various Republican-led states such as Michigan, Kansas, Wisconsin and Ohio. They meet in secret so that they can get measures passed before anyone opposed to them has time to act. What does this say about how they view democracy?
And of course, Mitch McConnell, who had previously announced that there would be a much more open legislative process concerning the healthcare bill, denied that Republicans were hiding anything. In a classic example of Republican doubletalk, he said: “We’ll let you see the bill when we finally release it. Nobody’s hiding the ball here. You’re free to ask anybody anything.” After the bill is written is when you can talk about it, of course. And, just because you can ask anybody about the bill—again, conveniently after it is written—this by no means suggests that the Republicans will change it in any way. This is just not how they operate—their attitude is: it’s our way, or the highway.
Actually, there really is no such thing as “Trumpcare” at all. The president has authored nothing on health care, and neither Paul Ryan or any of the other Republican leaders has worked with the president in coming up with some kind of plan. But, for simplicity’s sake, we will continue to refer to all Republican health care plans as “Trumpcare.” As I write this, in late July, 2017, it is obvious that the Republicans are unable to come up with any kind of consensus on what their alternative to Obamacare will actually be. Trump himself has shifted his position on the different House and Senate bills, making his strategy patently transparent: Whatever comes of all this, he wants to be able to deny responsibility for it and shift the blame onto others. This is standard operating procedure for Trump, and it will happen here.
While on the subject of names, Trumpcare might better be called “Billionaire Care” as the richest people in the country are the ones who will benefit from whatever plan (if any) the Republicans are able to come up with. The progressive think tank Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, has noted that the four hundred wealthiest American families would have, under the original Republican plan, received an estimated seven million dollars each per annum while approximately 23 million people will lose their coverage altogether. People between the ages of fifty and sixty-five would see their premiums go up by at least twenty percent, and perhaps twice that.
Trumpcare, presented as a new plan wasn’t new at all; it meant nothing less than millions of Americans losing their healthcare coverage, or else paying considerably more for less coverage. Meanwhile, the richest Americans would have received yet another tax break. How exactly would this have been an “improvement” over Obamacare, except to the top one percent of the population?
Perhaps the sleaziest part of this whole charade was reported by the Democratic National Committee: “They voted to let more illnesses go untreated and to force more families to have to choose between paying medical bills and putting food on the table. And because they knew how dangerous this vote would be, they even initially tried to exempt themselves from the consequences. Trumpcare for us, Obamacare for themselves.”
In point of fact, the Republicans spent all their time damning Obamacare, but never bothered to come up with a coherent counter-plan until Trump became president, promising to come up with something that is “much less expensive and much better.” During Obama’s presidency, the Republicans constantly insisted that they could come up with a plan that would give lower premiums and deductibles. They also promised lower co-payments, and more choices. So what did they deliver? A plan that, once revealed, was supported by a mere 17 percent of the American people. What does this say about Republican competence? They surely must have known they could not deliver on all the promises and alleged “improvements” they guaranteed to implement once they got in power. The facts are indisputable: The Republicans have nothing to replace Obamacare, and they know it. Of course, they aren’t honest enough to admit it. All their talk was nothing more than empty verbiage.
There were so many faults with Ryan’s hastily thrown together replacement scheme that it would take dozens of pages to enumerate them all. Here, I will focus on just a few of the more salient points.
***Trumpcare allowed individuals to put more into a health savings account, which in reality is nothing more than yet another tax break for the wealthiest Americans. While health savings accounts are not health insurance, they do allow wealthier people to claim significantly high tax benefits.
***Ryan’s plan would have completely gutted Planned Parenthood, explicitly stating that no federal funding can go to an organization that: “provides for abortions.” While the infamous Hyde amendment already states that no federal funding can go toward abortion, the Ryan plan goes further in that it takes Medicaid money from Planned Parenthood. What this amounts to is to remove a critical provider of women’s health care services away from women in the lower income bracket.
***Premium tax credits would be given to younger, wealthier individuals. These credits would start at levels of $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for families. The end result is that older people would be at the mercy of insurers who could legally charge them as much as five times the rate offered to the young. Again, we see Republican legislation (and taxpayer money) going to the wealthier people in society—the very people who are least in need of governmental largesse.
***Finally, anyone failing to obtain health coverage for two months or more would be forced to cough up a 30 percent surcharge on their premiums for an entire year. How could this possibly inspire anyone who has lost their insurance to try and get it again unless they are already sick? Ryan’s plan would thus see sicker people signing up, thereby incurring the wrath of health insurance companies.
All over the country, people rallied against the administration’s feeble efforts to repeal Obamacare. For example, a woman in Kentucky asked Mitch McConnell if he had a better plan, and if he did, she would “sit down and shut up,” as McConnell had infamously told Elizabeth Warren to do. Not surprisingly, he wasn’t able to come up with anything. And, Republican Dave Brat, after complaining about the “paid activists” who were standing up for Obamacare, was no doubt surprised to find that some of his constituents drove 165 miles to a town hall so they could inform him that no one was paying them to be there. In Arkansas, Republican senator Tom Cotton faced a decidedly angry room full of constituents who lambasted him because he wants to eliminate Obamacare. Finally, in Iowa, Senator Joni Ernst, facing an increasingly hostile crowd, is on video sneaking out a side door after only answering a few questions. The incensed crowd yelled at her to “do her job” as she made her cowardly exit. During the July 4 recess, only two Republican senators held town hall meetings. Shouldn’t that tell you something about how much support they have?
Incidents such as these have been taking place all over the country, leaving Republicans increasingly mystified over what to do. Some of their reactions were typical, such as requesting local police departments to restrict public access to their meetings. This is just another example of their determination to ignore the will of the people and continue doing what they want to do. The majority of Americans were able to see through the nonsensical aberration known as Trumpcare that threatened their healthcare. A basic comparison of Trumpcare versus Obamacare left few people wondering which was the better plan.
Ronald Reagan’s administration promoted “trickle-down” economics which did not work. The Republicans are now offering us “trickle-down” healthcare that will be equally unworkable. Elizabeth Warren summed up the whole situation perfectly: “These cuts are blood money. People will die. Senate Republicans are paying for tax cuts for the wealthy with American lives.”
DEMOCRACY, FREE SPEECH, CIVIL LIBERTIES AND 8 TRILLION DOLLARS
The same man who in 2012 said: “The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy” failed to say anything at all on the subject after the college decided the election in his favor. The same man who, commenting on the Oberge v. Hodges case, (a 2015 Supreme Court ruling that declared that same sex couples had, according to constitutional law, a right to marry) originally said the issue was “settled,” has since assembled a gallery of Republican rogues dedicated to overturning that ruling.
Trump and his reactionary Republican cronies aren’t the least bit interested in democracy. What they want is total control and to penalize anyone who dares to make any noise in protest. For example, a recent bill was introduced targeting protestors in which those who participate in such activities would be labeled “economic terrorists” which would be a class C felony. Never mind that peaceful protest is protected in the Constitution, it’s merely another effort to silence their critics. As reported in the Daily Kos: “The Republican state senator (who introduced the bill) said similar charges would apply to those who ‘fund, organize, sponsor’ such protests, and the bill would force such individuals to ‘pay restitution up to triple the amount of economic damage’ done.” (Mark Sumner, Daily Kos, November 17, 2016) This is only the tip of the iceberg. Greenpeace notes that: “In 19 states so far, laws have been proposed by conservative lawmakers that would crack down on peaceful protests, infringing on our right to free speech, undermining democracy, and putting human lives at risk. Peaceful assembly is protected under the Constitution.” (Greenpeace, via Daily Kos, May 3, 2017) Again, the Constitution stands in the way of what the Republicans want: a theofascist regime wherein they—and they alone—are calling the shots, and nobody is allowed to do anything about it.
Clearly, the Constitution means nothing to Trump and his henchmen. On November 29, 2016, he tweeted: “Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag—if they do, there must be consequences—perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail!” So much for freedom of speech. Never mind that both state and federal laws have ruled that such activity is legal or that the first amendment to the Constitution protects free speech or that proposed amendments making flag burning a crime have repeatedly been introduced and rejected. Despite this, Trump’s political appointees and the judicial cronies he wants to appoint will no doubt give him free rein to do this.
At this point I need to discuss an issue brought up by the Daily Kos back on August 18, 2015. This article concerns the Pentagon and what should be the biggest scandal of our time: the fact that they have absolutely no idea what has happened to 8.5 trillion dollars which have magically disappeared. Yes, you read that correctly: 8.5 trillion dollars. Incredibly, the mainstream media have generally ignored this story, an unbelievable situation which should shake our government and military to their foundations; perhaps that is why the media have failed to cover it. Apparently, losing over eight trillion dollars is business as usual. To put this number in perspective, it would cost every household in America some seventy thousand dollars to make up this “lost” money. The Kos article asks why no one is demanding to know what happened. To this I can only add: Why is The Kos the only media outlet making any noise about this ridiculous situation? This clearly should have been a major issue, perhaps the major issue brought up during the presidential debates. No questions, no exposure, no debates, no Senate hearings, no indictments or trials, no nothing. We are talking about a sum of money so inconceivably large that it is impossible to fathom; this is equal to one half of our national debt! While both of our major political parties should be up in arms over this, the Republicans in particular should be the ones leading the way to find out what happened, since fiscal accountability and cutting government spending are supposed to be their chief concerns. Instead, they harp about things like half a billion dollars in food stamps being a massive scandal or the “fact” that Obamacare would cost almost a trillion dollars over the next fifteen years. The Kos article expands on this scandal by asking: “Oh really, you’re concerned about deficit spending and the debt? Fully 1/3 of the national debt is money we sent the Pentagon and they can’t tell us where it went. It’s just gone. College for everyone will cost too much? You must be really pissed at the 8.5 Trillion, with a ‘t’, dollars the pentagon’s spent and can’t tell us where it went.” (Mtosner, Daily Kos, August 18, 2015) Perhaps the most amazing fact of all is that, despite their position of national importance, the Pentagon has never established any kind of accounting system! Obviously, given the magnitude of this loss, that should be a top priority, but neither party seems to think so.
Donald Trump promised to be a president for all Americans. The Pentagon scandal should be a focal point of his administration, but to date he has done nothing; neither he nor anyone in his administration has even mentioned it. The next time a politician talks about governmental waste, this issue should be the first thing asked of them: “Exactly what are you doing about the 8.5 trillion dollars the Pentagon cannot account for?” This is an issue that should concern every single American, yet we hear nothing at all about it from the mainstream media. Politicians do not discuss it. No one, except certain liberal media outlets, are mentioning it at all. This unbelievable situation must be exposed and action taken.
Let’s take a momentary aside to examine what today’s Republican leaders are actually advocating. First of all, let us focus on free speech and our civil liberties. Most people would agree these are cornerstones of our republic. The organization that was formed in 1920 to protect the basic freedoms of all Americans is the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU has become one of the favorite whipping boys of the Republican party, but this group supports free speech for anyone, with obvious limitations such as falsely shouting “fire” in a crowded movie theater. One of the things the ACLU does is to rate people and politicians according to how they defend free speech and Civil Liberties. Of the twelve people who received a 100% positive rating, all were Democrats. 65 people received a rating of less than 10%; all of these were Republicans. This is indicative of the very real totalitarian nature of the Republican party. Of course, when this is brought up to Trump supporters, they will invariably respond with something like: “Oh well, the ACLU is just another leftist organization.” In other words, protecting people’s civil rights is only a concern if you are a leftist.
In 1989, Trump wrote that: “civil liberties end when an attack on our safety begins.” In an essay entitled “The Reichstag Warning,” author Timothy Snyder, professor of history at Yale University, made it crystal clear what this statement means now that Trump is president: “The Reichstag fire shows how quickly a modern republic can be transformed into an authoritarian regime. There is nothing new, to be sure, in the politics of exception. The American Founding Fathers knew that the democracy they were creating was vulnerable to an aspiring tyrant who might seize upon some dramatic event as grounds for the suspension of our rights. As James Madison nicely put it, tyranny arises “on some favorable emergency.” For those unfamiliar with the analogy, the Reichstag fire took place in February 1933, one month after Adolf Hitler came to power, and was used by him as a justification for the suspension of Germany’s civil liberties, including freedom of expression, freedom of the press, the suspension of habeas corpus, and suspension of the right of free association and public assembly. Some historians have opined that Hitler himself ordered the fire in order to eliminate those liberties. What changed with the Reichstag fire was the use of terrorism as a catalyst for governmental changes. In 1989, two centuries after our Constitution was promulgated, the man who is now our president may well be looking for a similar incident as an excuse to suspend our rights as citizens. For much of the Western world, 1989 was a year when both security and liberty seemed to be expanding. 1989 was a year of liberation, as communist regimes came to an end in eastern Europe and new democracies were established. Yet that wave of democratization has since fallen under the glimmering shadow of the burning Reichstag. The aspiring tyrants of today have not forgotten the lessons of 1933: that acts of terror—real or fake, provoked or accidental—can provide the occasion to deal a death blow to democracy.”
Snyder’s comments indicate that Trump, like his fascist predecessors, will actively seek out some fake incident in order to “justify” removing our civil rights. He will do this in order to destroy democracy and install a government not beholden either to the U.S. Constitution or to the American people. This is yet another parallel between today’s proto-fascist regime and its Nazi predecessor. Trump’s ally Vladimir Putin also used the threat of terrorism to secure his place at the top of the heap in Russian politics. When he did so, his approval rating was at virtual zero. Likewise, Trump’s approval rating is also in constant decline. How long it takes for him to find an appropriate scapegoat is anyone’s guess.
DICTATORS, WOMEN’S RIGHTS, AND THE REPUBLICAN ECONOMIC AGENDA
Another problem is that Trump seems to have no problem cozying up to dictators. This was first noted during the presidential campaign when he complimented Russian dictator Vladimir Putin. It was again on display when Trump invited Egyptian dictator Abdel Fattah Sisi to the Oval Office. This man, according to a Los Angeles Times article: “…holds at least 40,000 political prisoners, secular democrats as well as Islamic Islamic extremists. His security forces have killed thousands—at least 817 at a single demonstration, according to Human Rights Watch. Trump hailed SIsi as ;a hero’ and added: ‘We are very much behind President Sisi. He’s done a fantastic job in a very difficult situation.’ (Doyle McManus, Los Angeles Times, April 5, 2017)
Putin and Sisi are not the only dictators Trump seems anxious to befriend. He invited Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte to the White House, a man who has been universally condemned by countless international human rights groups. Not only has Duterte instigated a series of extralegal executions, he has even had the audacity to claim to have personally murdered three people while serving as mayor of Davao City. When the United Nations High Commissioner for human rights demanded an investigation into what he has done, Duterte called him and idiot and then threatened to torch the United Nations headquarters in New York City. Despite this, Trump is extending a welcoming hand to this maniac, as he has to far too many other dictators. To cite yet another example, North Korea’s Kim Jong Un has murdered his opponents, yet, Trump insists he too is doing a “fantastic job” and is a “pretty smart cookie.”
This is where Trump stands with regard to dictators: He has offered unabashed praise for Sisi, Duterte, Kim Jong Un and, of course, Vladimir Putin. America has a president who welcomes dictators who engage in murder, views the free press as a threat, and believes torture to be an effective military tactic. What does this say about how Trump views civil rights? What does it say about how he views democracy and due process of law? Moreover, what does all this say about the American politicians who remained silent about these insults to our national dignity?
The answer is simple: Trump has a long history of associating with other con men and shysters and has no regard whatever for the interests of the people he is supposed to be serving. Associating with supremely immoral people is not an aberration with Trump; it’s how he has always conducted his business.
Simply put, Trump’s foreign policy consists of the notion: “If you don’t agree with me, you are the enemy.” Countries or leader that have a history of human rights abuses are welcome in the present administration, if they agrees with Trump’s agenda. An article in the Daily Kos ties it all together: “Stephen Bannon, Trump’s resident white nationalist ideologue, promised an unending fight for ‘deconstruction of the administrative state.’ The Trump cabinet was chosen because of the destruction they will unleash. Leaving America as we know it in ruins is their goal. To wit, the Trump regime is already at war with truth and our civil liberties expressed in the Bill of Rights such as their attack on the First Amendment.” (Magnifico, Daily Kos, February 27, 2017) The article, referring to Trump’s strategies, also notes: “These must be seen for what they are: the strong-arm tactics of an authoritarian. It is, in fact, a signature of authoritarian rulers that they turn the opposition into the enemy. The opposition is to be engaged and persuaded; the enemy is to be isolated and crushed.” The article indicates just how power-mad Trump and his cohorts actually are. Quoting Snyder: “Once an authoritarian regime is established, the threat of terrorism can be used to deepen repression, or indeed to promote it abroad.” If this were not enough, the article ends with an ominous warning: “Trump and his advisers have been saying for more than a year on how dangerous his regime will become and now they are putting their words into action. Last year Omarosa Manigault, who is now Trump’s director of communications for the Office of Public Liaison, promised that: ‘every critic, every detractor, will have to bow down to President Trump… It’s everyone who’s ever doubted Donald, whoever disagreed, whoever challenged him — it is the ultimate revenge to become the most powerful man in the universe.’” Manigault is describing exactly how a dictator operates. If this doesn’t wake up America, what will?
Be forewarned America. Stand up now or be crushed. The new fascists are here, and they will stop at nothing to get total control and to take over our lives. My life. Your life. And everyone else’s. If, after having read this far, you still think we should “give him a chance,” then you will be co-responsible for what ensues.
One of the most amazing contradictions I’ve noticed is when Republicans claim to be against big government. This stance only applies when government is providing services and assistance to those in need; in those circumstances, Republicans are united in their desire to remove those services. Despite the obviously scandalous nature concerning the disappearance of the Pentagon trillions, the Republicans remain conspicuously silent. They only become outraged about government spending when it goes to American citizens. Government waste in the military is obviously not a concern, no matter how extreme the financial loss happens to be. They support the Patriot Act; they have no problem telling everyone who they can or cannot marry; they have no problem forcing people to recite the cognitively meaningless Pledge of Allegiance; they have no problem discriminating against anyone who doesn’t conform to their antediluvian notions of which god to believe in and which religion to follow; and they want to eliminate a woman’s right to choose abortion. Despite their repeated claims to “get government off our backs,” these same Republicans have no problem at all with the government getting larger and larger as long as this growth is being used to spy on American citizens and telling them how to live.
A woman’s right to choose to terminate her pregnancy is anathema to the Republicans, Christian fundamentalists that they are. Naral, after noting that Trump has declared war on birth control, went on as follows: “After Mike Pence cast the tiebreaking vote in the U.S. Senate, Donald Trump signed a law that emboldens states to deny funding to clinics that provide millions of women with birth control, cancer screenings, and other preventative care. And because they knew that women would be outraged, no reporters were even allowed into the closed-door bill-signing.” (Naral, April 22, 2017) More decisions made against the people behind closed doors. If Trump wants to give government back to the people, as he said in his inaugural address, why the secrecy?
But this new law isn’t just about abortion. Authored by anti-choice fanatics, it will also deny cancer screenings, STD tests and birth control to low-income women. The bill is all about controlling women’s reproductive rights.
May 4, 2017 proved to be a landmark day for Republicans seeking to eliminate women’s rights. As Naral reported: “First Trump signed an executive order to allow employers to take birth control coverage away their workers. Then House Republicans passed a bill to kick 24 million people off health care, take maternity coverage away from millions more, attack Planned Parenthood, and essentially make being a woman a pre-existing condition. And what did they do after all that? They had crates of beer wheeled into the Capitol so they could celebrate all the damage they’d done…Women with breast cancer will see their premiums skyrocket by $28,660 a year. A completed pregnancy with no complications is a pre-existing condition that will cost you $17,320 a year. Other pre-existing conditions would include surviving domestic violence, C-sections, postpartum depression, menstrual cramps, and heavy periods. But you know what’s not included? Erectile dysfunction.” (Llyse Hogue, Naral. May 5, 2017) Can anyone claim that the intention of all this is anything other than the efforts of a group of misogynist men trying to keep women “in their place?”
Given that Republicans have always claimed to be “experts” in the economy, I have always found it fascinating that the most heavily Republican states in the union, the ones in which we find almost no liberal politicians, are always the states at the bottom of the economic heap. Democrats should be jumping on this as proof that Republican economic policies equate with economic backwardness. I would love to hear the conservative rationalizations on why this is the case. For once, they can’t blame the liberals!
Case in point: Kansas governor Sam Brownback. This man’s main agenda has been to implement huge tax cuts in his state, the end result of which has been massive budget shortfalls which, according to a Los Angeles Times article, has: “sent Kansas into a political tailspin.” (Matt Pearce, Los Angeles Times, June 8, 2017) A typical hard-nosed politician, Brownback has been utterly unwilling to back away from the plan he thought would promote business growth in his state. Against his wishes, the state voted to increase income taxes; the article notes the increases would: “raise a projected $1.2 billion over the next two years. The state had been facing a $889 million budget shortfall through June 2019.” Brownback fought back, claiming lawmakers had made a wrong move which over time would hurt the state. However, lawmakers and most Kansans recognized that the tax cuts were hurting the states infrastructure, including schools, private businesses, and other entities people depend on. Brownback is another fundamentalist Christian politician totally removed from fiscal reality; his faith in god is apparently only matched by his faith in his own failed economic policies. And, as with every type of faith, no amount of facts will dissuade him from his chosen course. It should also be noted that, due to his mismanagement of his state’s finances, Brownback was rated the most unpopular governor in America, until recently replaced at the bottom of the heap by New Jersey’s Chris Christie.
These same Republican financial “experts” are conspicuously silent when the subject of presidential expenditures comes up. Protecting the president and his huge extended family has cost the American people countless millions of dollars already, and there is no indication that the numbers are about to go down. A Los Angeles Times article delved into this in some depth. The sub-title noted: “The bill for the first family’s first 100 days is at least $30 million. Journeys include his sons’ business trips.” (Barbara Demick, Los Angeles Times, May 8, 2017) The article notes: “A unique set of circumstances has made the current presidential family the most expensive in history.” Due to the size of his entourage, Congress: “set aside an extra $61 million to reimburse New York and Palm Beach for some of their expenses incurred since the election to protect the first family…the jump in costs is largely due to the fact that Trump has used three separate residences—the White House, Trump Tower and Mar—a-Lago. Over the weekend he added a fourth: the Bedminster, N.J., golf club where the family has traditionally spent summer weekends.
In addition to protecting the president and first lady,the Secret Service guards five children, their three spouses and eight grandchildren—16 people in all.” In addition, taxpayers are footing the bill to protect Trump Tower and Mar-a-Lago, Mar-a-Lago costs taxpayers an estimated $1 million every time Trump spends a weekend there. It was Trump who criticized Barack Obama for taking too many vacations, saying: “If you’re in the White House, who wants to take a vacation?” But now that he is president, Trump has suddenly changed course; his vacations are taking up to 28% of his time. And of course, Trump’s conflicts of interest are nowhere better illustrated when we note that the foreign travel of his two sons on business excursions are also paid for by U.S. taxpayers. Finally, the article compares Trump’s (at the time) three-and-a-half months of expenses with Obama’s one year expenses of $12 million.
Rootstrikers gets right to the heart of the problem: “Trump is once again laughing at the Constitution. He’s refusing to even keep track of the foreign guests at staying at his numerous properties—creating a massive opening for foreign governments to funnel money right into Trump’s pockets in violation of the U.S. Constitution. Trump’s company says that it is ‘impractical’ to require these guests to identify themselves. The truth is that it’s unconstitutional—a blatant violation of the emoluments clause, which bans the president from accepting payments from foreign governments. Now we have to wonder: When Trump makes official economic or military decisions as president, will he really put the interests of Americans first—or the foreign governments who’ve been greasing his palms?” (Kurt Walters, Rootstrikers, June 4, 2017) The same month, Rootstrikers was able to report some good news: “196 members of Congress have filed a lawsuit against Donald Trump for violating the Constitution…That’s because we’ve never had a sitting president so openly disregard the Constitution. The Trump Organization’s profits still flow to Trump, letting foreign governments funnel money to Trump through his properties in the U.S. and business dealings in over 20 different countries—all in violation of the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution clearly states in the Foreign Emoluments Clause, that no public official can accept ‘emoluments:’ gifts, payments, or profits from a foreign government without the consent of Congress. And that hasn’t happened. Instead of divesting from Trump Organization, Donald Trump merely handing the reigns over to his sons, while still collecting and getting regular updates on profits.” (Reuben Hayslett, Rootstrikers, June 20, 2017)
Republicans also go ballistic whenever alternatives to big oil/big business are introduced. They don’t want progress; they want their business supporters to thrive and innovative ideas threaten that. For example, when Tesla introduced the SUV/CUV Model X, Republicans fought the idea tooth and nail, not because this is a super-expensive model, made by a billionaire CEO for rich Americans, but because, heaven forbid, it would help to save the environment and make clean energy appear palatable to the masses. And, as noted by the Sierra Club, the auto industry is also a target by the new administration: “Donald Trump and EPA head Scott Pruitt joined auto executives in Detroit to announce their intention to roll back historic fuel-efficiency standards that protect our air and save drivers money at the pump. Let’s be clear: this is a destructive move that will only help Big Oil’s profits, and it’s a shameful reversal by the automakers like Ford and GM that welcomed these stronger standards with President Obama back in 2009. Cleaner car standards are working by making new cars safer and more efficient, and America’s families are seeing real savings and benefits…The historic vehicle efficiency standards set by the Obama administration are already a proven success. Cars and trucks are more efficient than ever before, and the current goal of raising the average fuel economy of passenger vehicles to 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025 would significantly reduce oil use and cut climate pollution by as much as 6 billion metric tons. That’s equivalent to the annual carbon pollution from 150 coal-fired power plants. Consumers are also saving money at the pump, with these standards expected to save American families more than $1.7 trillion in fuel costs by 2025. The auto industry is innovating and creating jobs, and auto workers are assembling ever-more advanced vehicles that consumers want to buy. These standards have led to more than half a million Americans switching to electric vehicles that rely on little to no oil at all.” (Andrew Linhardt, Sierra Club, March 15, 2017)
Another alarming action took place in April, 2017 when the Republican-led House of Representatives: “voted to do away with privacy protections that stopped internet service providers (ISPs) from selling your private data to the highest bidder. This followed the bill passing through the Senate last week. In both cases only Republicans voted to get rid of privacy protections while Democrats voted to protect consumer rights.” (Daily Kos, April 25, 2017) The article goes on to make a most salient point: “Since Republicans in both the Senate and House clearly have no problems with big companies like Comcast and Verizon and Charter selling your private data to the highest bidder, they should have no problems with releasing their private data to the public.” Of course, there is no chance that this will happen. Republicans want everyone’s personal information available to them, but don’t want to release anything about themselves. Yet another example of how fascist governments operate.
Then there is the issue of Net Neutrality. This is yet another issue that will benefit large corporations at the expense of the rest of us. Demand Progress explains the situation: “The internet is a tool that we rely on every day. It’s needed for most schoolwork and jobs, and, of course, it’s the way most people keep in touch with family and friends. But Comcast and Ajit Pai, the former Verizon lawyer that Trump put in charge of the FCC, want to create an internet slow lane for anyone who can’t afford to pay ISPs’ steep access fees. Getting rid of net neutrality means high-speed internet for corporate America and a slow, buggy internet for the rest of us.” (Kurt Walters, Demand Progress, April 24, 2017) Demand Progress noted: “Just minutes ago, Trump’s FCC chair publicly announced his plans to kill net neutrality, gutting the rules protecting a free and open internet that Demand Progress members fought so hard for. It would be a green light for Comcast and Verizon to create the corporate-controlled internet their executives dream of at night.” (Kurt Walters, Demand Progress, April 26, 2017) Even more importantly, ending Net Neutrality also means the end to online freedom of speech. Another step closer to a fascist regime.
Demand Progress followed up this report on May 6, 2017: “Verizon just launched its latest strategy for repealing net neutrality: Attack us, the supporters of net neutrality. According to a slick new Verizon video, there is no actual threat to the free and open internet. It’s all just myth created by groups like Demand Progress to rile up the Democratic base.” (Kurt Walters, Demand Progress, May 6, 2017) The report goes on to note the various lies told by Verizon in order to bolster its claims: “What’s most outrageous about Verizon’s new video is after it accuses our side of lying, the creators continue to lie through the rest of the video.
They say Verizon isn’t trying to kill net neutrality. (It is.) They say that broadband internet—built on a wireless spectrum that belongs to the public and fiber laid across public land—isn’t a public utility. (It is). They argue that net neutrality rules don’t have to come under Title II of the Communications Act. (They do, because Verizon won a lawsuit challenging similar rules under Title I) It doesn’t take too much imagination to predict which side of the issue the Trump administration supports, especially considering the fact that he appointed a Verizon lobbyist as his new chairperson of the Federal Communications Commission. Their goals are obvious, and it doesn’t just involve rolling back Net Neutrality rules; people’s ability to use the internet to help fight Trump’s corrupt administration could be seriously impaired. Verizon, Comcast and other Internet Service Providers will be able to watch everything we do online and control what we do and what we say. This is 1984 all over again, made to order for the communications age.
With Pai calling the shots, the FCC announced in May, 2017 that it was moving forward with its plan to dismantle net neutrality with a plan called, of all things, “Restoring Internet Freedom,” which is as much an oxymoron as “square circle.” Just what is it that they are “restoring?”
Actions such as this are proof positive, if any further proof were needed, that the Trump administration cares not a whit for the American people and their well-being; their only concern is how to keep big oil and big corporations happy.
As I write this, late in July, 2017, there appears to be a bright light at the end of the net neutrality tunnel. When he found out that less than 20 percent of Republicans support ending net neutrality, Trump has begun backing off his support for it.
Senate Republicans have wasted no time introducing legislation that would benefit corporate polluters. As Sierra Rise noted: “The Midnight Rules Relief Act would let Congress quash safeguards enacted in Barack Obama’s final year as president with a single vote of disapproval. Agencies would then be banned from adopting similar rules without Congress acting. This bill could eliminate a number of policies the SierraRise community has advanced, including tougher limits on lead in public housing and endangered species protections for the rusty patched bumble bee. The Regulations From the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act — or, ugh, REINS Act — would require Congress to approve all major regulations within 70 legislative days — even if the changes were previously mandated by Congress. Given how slowly Congress moves, that deadline alone could kill rules, even when the majority agrees with them. The so-called Regulatory Accountability Act would prevent agencies from finalizing rules if there is a less-costly alternative, even if it is completely ineffective. The bill also throws a number of bureaucratic obstacles in the way to delay progress. Federal action would become an easy target for defeat and deadlock by well-financed special interests.” (Sierra Rise, March 15, 2017)
In his last year in office, President Obama’s Labor Secretary issued the “Fiduciary Rule.” This was scheduled to go into effect on April 10, 2017. The rule keeps financial advisers from leading people to bad investments that might give them kickbacks; they were required instead to provide sound investment advice in their customers best interest. However, Senate Republicans would have none of it. Instead, they sided with Wall Street (surprise!) to stop the rule before it went into effect. Consequently, the rule is currently in limbo. Without it, retirees may lose as much as $17 billion each year due to dishonest advisors. Corruption, dishonesty, cheating, and outright lies—that is the bread and butter of today’s Republican party. Any American who thinks the Republican party serves their best interests is simply denying reality.
Some of the legislation Republicans have introduced defies belief, it is so extreme, hate-filled, and downright un-American. To cite but one example, the Daily Kos ran an article on North Dakota’s Keith Kempenich: “North Dakota lawmaker Republican Keith Kempenich believes he has a solution to massive protests. Allow regular citizens the legal right to run over protestors! A bill sponsored by state Rep. Keith Kempenich, R-Bowman, would protect drivers from legal consequences if they inadvertently hit, injure or kill pedestrians who are obstructing traffic. The legislation is a direct response to the massive protests around the Standing Rock Indian Reservation, Kempenich said.
“If you stay off the roadway, this would never be an issue,” Kempenich said. “Those motorists are going about the lawful, legal exercise of their right to drive down the road. … Those people didn’t ask to be in this.” (Walter Einenkel, Daily Kos, January 17, 2017) All I can say to this is…unbelievable!
CHRISTIAN NATIONALISM AND THEOFASCIST LEGISLATION
As we have already seen, right-wing Republican politics have gone hand-in-hand with fundamentalist religion, creating a noxious potion that threatens the welfare not only of our country, but of the rest of the world. They want Christianity to be the official religion in the United States. They want Creationism (or its spawn, Intelligent Design) to replace proven evolutionary science. They want to be able to freely discriminate against the LGBTQ community. And they want women to play a subservient role to men. All of this can be traced to literal biblical belief. I will first examine the issue of creationism.
The idea of a god who created the cosmos is as old as religion itself. The Radical Religious Right (RRR) wants the biblical creation story taught as historical fact; the scientific theory of evolution is anathema to them. They misuse the word theory (“it’s only a guess”) and attack evolution as being immoral. Some creationists have proven themselves to be competent rationalizers for their beliefs, but being able to rationalize is not the same thing as being rational.
Ken Ham, an Australian creationist living in Kentucky, has created a theme park built on a replica of Noah’s Ark. Church and State reported an unintentionally amusing exchange that took place between a reporter, Charles Wolford, and Andrew Snelling, a geologist who works at the park: “Snelling asserted that dinosaurs and humans lived at the same time. For evidence of this, he cited Beowulf, the Old English epic poem, which contains an account of a king battling a dragon (it has long been Ham’s belief that old legends of dragons are really descriptions of dinosaurs.) “So you take Beowulf to be evidence of dinosaurs existing?” Wolford asked. Snelling replied, “yes. It was an eyewitness account.” Not exactly. Beowulf, as anyone who has read it knows, is a work of fiction. It’s no more evidence for the existence of dragons than The Odyssey proves that the cyclops was real.” (Church and State, February, 2017) Despite this being conclusive evidence of the ignorance of those who created and run this sham of a park, an ongoing issue has been whether taxpayers should foot the bill and subsidize the nonsense they are dishing out to the public.
One of the most common Christian Nationalist claims is that the United States was founded as a “Christian Nation” and that the founders were all conservative Christians. It is also claimed that our government is founded on Christian principles. Nothing could be further from the truth. The 1797 Treaty of Tripoli alone destroys this argument. Written by Joel Barlow, it says in part: “The government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.” This was voted on and unanimously passed by Congress, and then signed by President John Adams. Not surprisingly, Republican leaders, even if they are aware of this crucial piece of early legislation, choose to ignore it or else try to “re-interpret” it to their liking. This cannot be done; the words and intentions of the founders are crystal clear: We are not a Christian nation, we are a free nation. Having said that, the Christian right has been so successful in recent years in destroying our fundamental rights that we are indeed becoming a Christian nation, in the very worst sense of the term. If they have their way, legislation will eventually be introduced that makes Christianity the official religion of these United States. It doesn’t take too much imagination to envision what would follow for those who are not Christian.
The Treaty of Tripoli is not just an isolated incident; there is much more the founders had to say about religion and our liberty. To be sure, few of the founders were what today we would call atheists, but equally certain is the fact that none of them would qualify as fundamentalist Christians. Here are a few more telling quotes from them:
***John Adams: “The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity.”
***Thomas Jefferson: “Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the common law.” (Letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814) He also noted that: “The Christian god is cruel, vindictive, capricious and unjust.”
***James Madison: “The civil government … functions with complete success … by the total separation of the Church from the State.” (Writings, 8:432, 1819) As to the role of the church, Madison notes: “In no instance have…the churches been guardians of the liberties of the people.”
***Benjamin Franklin: “Revealed religion has no weight with me.” And: “the way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason.”
***George Washington: “Religion is a matter which belongs to the church, and not to the state.”
Are these the words of men who sought to establish a Christian Nation? Or is the Christian Right, as they are in virtually everything else they say, wrong on this?
There are countless more quotes from the founders on this issue, but the point should be obvious that the founders did indeed promulgate the idea of total separation between religion and government. But so many of today’s Christian Republican leaders aren’t interested in real history; as with their religion in general (not to mention their political views), they don’t want truth, they want validation. To illustrate the point, let us examine the work of one of the best-known contemporary Christian revisionists. David Barton is the author of “The Myth of Separation” which was published by Wallbuilder Press in Aledo Texas. Wallbuilder is a small publishing company specializing (not surprisingly) in fundamentalist religious literature; one would think if Barton were any kind of intellectual heavyweight, he would have been published by one of the major publishing houses. The fact that he has no degrees in history or higher education and yet remains one of the highest “authorities” the Christian Right can muster to “validate” their cause, is a telling indictment of the paucity of documentation favorable to their view. Barton’s strategy is a common one in the Christian Right: he ignores what the fathers actually said about religion and either creates his own quotes or else finds spurious quotes from others which he then claims were the actual words of the founders. Naturally, his followers remain blissfully (and probably intentionally) ignorant of this; they hear what they want to hear. Nonetheless, Barton’s lies eventually caught up with him and he retreated with his tail between his legs—for about a year, after which time he re-emerged, spouting the same nonsense to the same audiences who lapped it all up as if nothing had happened and Barton was a legitimate historian. So much for intellectual integrity in the Christian Right!
The founders, were they alive today, would never have had the colossal arrogance to state that their views had the support of god, Jesus, or the Bible. They would be appalled at the dishonesty of the Christian Nationalist movement and their oft-repeated spurious quotes and mis-statements they have created in the founders’ names. David Barton’s rejuvenated lies illustrate the classical truism that the big lie, if repeated often enough, soon becomes the truth in most people’s eyes. Today’s Christian Nationalists, like their Nazi predecessors, recognized this obvious truism and played on it. The Christian Nationalists aren’t interested in real history or in objectively provable claims; they want to re-write everything to their satisfaction, and use these lies as a foundation in their effort to turn the United States into a pre-rationalist country in which they have complete control over everything and everyone.
The Christian Nationalists consider Ronald Reagan to be one of their heroes, but, as right-wing as he was, Reagan was not one of them. He was certainly a Republican, and an extremely conservative one at that, but some of his words and actions belie the notion that he would have been an ardent supporter of today’s Republicans. For example, when he was governor of California, he signed a bill that legalized abortion if the “well-being” of the mother became an issue. While he was pro-life, he wasn’t a completely inflexible demagogue, at least on that point. He also knew, as a politician, the importance of compromise, an idea completely foreign to today’s Republican Party.
To show how primitive and morally backward most of the Republican leaders of today are, many of them still support the idea of torture, even though this has long since proven to be an ineffective way of obtaining information as people being tortured will say just about anything to make the torture stop. Dick Cheney, the former Vice President under George W. Bush was a big supporter of torture. He also bragged in his memoir about being a war criminal—which he certainly was and should have been prosecuted as such. Republicans invariably claim that torture techniques such as water boarding, rectal feedings and other inhumane practices are necessary to keep America safe. But torture has gleaned no useful information for us at all; it’s barbaric and unworthy of a country that is supposed to be a leader of the free world. Of course, none of this will dissuade the medievalists in the Republican party. By supporting torture, we see another ideological similarity between far too many of today’s Republicans and their Nazi predecessors.
Yet another example illustrating just how ludicrous, dangerous, anti-Constitutional, and un-American so many of these Republican leaders are, consider an incident that transpired in Kansas in 2016. A bill was introduced that would have allowed the impeachment of any judge who acts contrary to the wishes of the legislature. (Dartagnan, Daily Kos, March 9, 2016) If a judge strikes down any law, or attempts to change any law passed by the legislature, this bill would have allowed for his impeachment—by the legislature. In other words, if the legislature passes a law that the judiciary finds to be unconstitutional and rules accordingly, the legislature can impeach that judge. Obviously, the idea of separation of powers, a founding principle of our democracy, means nothing to the Republican legislators in Kansas. To quote Senator Tom Holland: “SB 439 blatantly seeks to muzzle our Kansas Supreme Court and compromises its ability to freely interpret and serve as the ultimate arbiter of Kansas law.” Fortunately, this insane power grab was killed in committee after initially passing in a 21-19 vote. This instance should serve as an illustration of the kinds of laws we should expect with Donald Trump in the White House and Republicans in control of Congress. These people will continue to act as if there are no limitations as to what they can say or do.
As if daring the American people to stop them and their fascistic agenda, on January 2, 2017, Congressional Republicans place at the head of their list of things to do once Trump ascended to the presidency was to gut the Congressional Ethics Committee. This is an independent group created to serve Congress and the American people. As the Daily Kos noted: “But in the era of Donald Trump, you don’t criticize the president for a failure of ethics. You criticize the ethics office for not praising Trump.” (Mark Sumner, Daily Kos, January 13, 2017) Public reaction was swift as Republicans began to look like the conniving Orwellian thieves they are, and they were quickly forced to put this item on the back burner—not discard it, just postpone it. Despite the outcry from the public, Rep. Jason Chaffetz, who heads the House Oversight Committee, still had the audacity to threaten to subpoena Walter Shaub, the director of the federal Office of Governmental Ethics if he refused to participate in an official interview. His agenda, and that of the Republican theocrats in Washington is crystal clear: Anyone daring to make an issue of Trump’s conflicts of interest, or even to criticize him in any way, will be dismissed and possibly prosecuted. Again, this is not democracy; it is fascism pure and simple.
Corruption in American politics, while always present, received a huge shot in the arm with the 2010 decision in the case of Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission. That decision has been disastrous for American politics as it has said that corporations and individuals may contribute as much money as they like in support of political candidates. Supporters justified the decision by saying that failure to pass the bill would somehow violate free speech. President Obama, however, correctly noted that the decision: “gives the special interests and their lobbyists even more power in Washington—while undermining the influence of average Americans who make small contributions to support their preferred candidates.” He commented later that: “I can’t think of anything more devastating to the public interest.” Former president Jimmy Carter agreed, noting: “The erroneous ruling of the Supreme Court, where millionaires, billionaires can put in unlimited amounts of money, gives legal bribery the chance to prevail.” The cost of the 2016 presidential was the costliest in history—six and a half billion dollars were spent. Either the Republicans must admit that people suddenly became incredibly wealthy under Obama, or else that corporations are determining election results. There are no other possibilities.
The Federal Election Commission plays a crucial role in our political system. As Credo Action notes: “The Federal Election Commission (FEC) has a specific role to play. It is responsible for monitoring and enforcing the Federal Election Campaign Act. The act prohibits foreign spending for the purpose of influencing an election and prevents campaigns from coordinating with foreign groups. This means that the FEC has the authority to investigate whether Russians spent money to interfere in our election and whether there was any coordination between Russian operatives and anyone from the Trump campaign. The FEC has a history of being divided along partisan lines, so it is unlikely commissioners will use their full authority unless there is massive pressure to do so. We need to do everything we can to make sure FEC commissioners use their power to protect the integrity of our democracy. TIME Magazine recently reported that Russian operatives bought Facebook ads to promote fake anti-Clinton news stories. That news prompted FEC member Ellen Weintraub to say that, if true, those reports could represent a potential violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act that should be investigated.” (Heidi Hess, Credo Action, June 5, 2017)
Money does talk. The huge donations from super-rich individuals and corporations lead to a corruption of government, since elected officials owe their positions and allegiance to those people, and not to anyone else. The question Citizens United supporters will never answer is: When Congress legislates, who will they be listening to? The people whose lives will be affected, or the companies who bought them their position and is lining their pockets?
Credo Action reports on the latest (as of this writing) example of Mitch McConnell’s chicanery: “While the public and the media are distracted by Donald Trump’s latest tweet, Mitch McConnell is quietly—and quickly—moving a dangerous and dirty energy bill through the Senate that would line the pockets of the fossil fuel industry and could lock in our dependence on fossil fuels for decades to come. The so-called ‘Energy and Natural Resources Act of 2017’ would increase fracking, allow the government to more easily approve dirty oil and gas pipelines and exacerbate the climate crisis even more. Mitch McConnell knows how unpopular this legislation is—so he’s fast-tracking the bill without a single public hearing, illustrating once again the importance the Christian Nationalists place on secrecy. The oil and gas lobby wants nothing more than to see this bill slip by without the public’s knowledge or input. The Trump-McConnell dirty energy bill is one of the worst energy bills ever introduced in the Senate. Specifically, it would: (1) Speed up the approval of liquefied natural gas export terminals, which would increase domestic fracking; (2) Give significantly more power to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, a largely unaccountable federal energy agency, to sanction new natural gas projects; and (3) Authorize hundreds of millions of dollars for research and development into extracting methane hydrates, known as ‘flammable ice,’ which are frozen fossil fuel deposits under the ocean floor and are potent greenhouse gasses.” (Josh Nelson, Credo Action, July 11, 2017) So much for business and politicians acting in our interests.
Some of the most noxious comments ever directed by a public official have come from Republicans. For example, Mike Enzi, a Republican senator from Wyoming, the state in which Matthew Shepard was beaten and tortured to death solely because he was gay, was asked by a student at Graybull High School and Middle School what he was doing to support the LGBTQ communities in Wyoming. Referring to Shepard, Enzi said: “The guy who wears a tutu to the bar and is surprised” when he is treated different is “asking for it.” In response, the Matthew Shepard Foundation noted that: “It’s the same kind of rhetoric that keeps up to 61% of hate crime victims from reporting because they are afraid of not being believed while also having to be fearful of being re-victimized by those in power, who should be defending their rights.” (Gabe Ortiz, Daily Kos, April 25, 2017)
Perhaps the most extreme example of Republican hatred was aimed at Obama by Georgia Senator David Perdue who urged his audience to pray for Obama’s death. Here is the actual prayer uttered:
Let his days be few; and let another take his office.
Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow.
Let his children be continually vagabonds, and beg: let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places.
Let the extortioner catch all that he hath; and let the strangers spoil his labour.
Let there be none to extend mercy unto him: neither let there be any to favor his fatherless children.
Let his posterity be cut off; and in the generation following let their name be blotted out.
Let the iniquity of his fathers be remembered with the Lord; and let not the sin of his mother be blotted out.
Let it be noted at this point that the gentle Senator from Georgia is considered a moderate by his constituents. As unbelievable as this is, there have been no calls for his resignation, no public outcry of any kind, not even from Democrats, and, not surprisingly, almost no media coverage at all. If anyone thinks that “everyone in politics does this,” let them come up with a similar example from a Democrat.
Having said all that, the Republicans are in major disarray. Although they control both houses of Congress, the executive branch, and the judicial branch as well, in-fighting rather than unity has been their calling card. Look at their spectacular disasters: No wall to keep out the illegals, no Obamacare repeal, no tax reforms of any kind, no infrastructure package, no prosecution of Hillary Clinton for her alleged “crimes”—nothing. Clearly, while they seem to have obstructionism and lying down to a fine art, actually doing something seems beyond their grasp. Instead, they are turning on themselves. And the American people are waiting, endlessly waiting for some kind of leadership that cannot happen. The inescapable fact is that the Republican party is imploding due to its inner contradictions, lies, and general immorality. For progressives, the end can’t come too soon.
Within a month of Trump’s ascension, Republicans were already running scared from their constituents. Republican members of congress are more and more insulating themselves from those who want to question their actions and those of the president. Many voters have been met with closed doors and a police presence, further evidence of a country moving progressively closer to fascism. These Republicans respond by calling voters “radicals” which in their twisted alternate reality simply means that they don’t want to be responsive to the people who elected them.
Let’s consider a few more of the words uttered by Trump himself. Did he conduct a gentlemanly campaign against Hillary Clinton? Even his most ardent supporters cannot claim he did. Some of his comments are so outlandish that it’s singularly amazing that he hasn’t been committed to an asylum for the criminally insane. At a Florida rally, he hinted that he wouldn’t be opposed to violence against his opponent. As reported by the New York Times on September 16, 2016, Trump stated: “I think that [Hillary Clinton’s] bodyguards should drop all weapons. They should disarm. Immediately…Let’s see what happens to her. Take their guns away, okay? It’ll be very dangerous.” This is exactly the type of rhetoric one has come to expect from the gun lobby, who contributed countless millions to his campaign. But is this rhetoric deserving of a presidential candidate?
Like George W. Bush, Trump on occasion seems to be quite incoherent. Here is a direct quote from him which was taken from a video. Read this and see if you can make any sense of it: “Look, having nuclear—my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart —you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I’m one of the smartest people anywhere in the world—it’s true!—but when you’re a conservative Republican they try—oh, do they do a number—that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune—you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged—but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me—it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are (nuclear is powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what’s going to happen and he was right—who would have thought?), but when you look at what’s going on with the four prisoners—now it used to be three, now it’s four—but when it was three and even now, I would have said it’s all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don’t, they haven’t figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it’s gonna take them about another 150 years—but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us.”
This is the man Americans voted in as their president. A man so completely divorced from reality that he can’t put together a coherent speech. Or, apparently, a simple sentence.
Of course, the National Rifle Association was ecstatic over Trump’s victory. He has repaid them by promising to put guns in schools on the first day of his presidency (yet another broken campaign promise) and to rescind Obama’s actions on gun trafficking. And, on February 27, 2017, a rule making it difficult for mentally impaired individuals to purchase guns was rescinded by the administration. What possible logic can there be to give people with mental disabilities weapons? The rationalization for rescinding this law was ridiculously specious: It was claimed that the rule was in violation of the second Amendment! Let’s recognize this for what it is: yet another sop to the NRA.
TRUMP AND RELIGION, IMMIGRATION, AND THE ADMINISTRATION’S SUPPORTERS
Even though Trump has never had any strong religious beliefs, when he announced his candidacy, all of that suddenly changed and he began talking like a diehard member of the Radical Religious Right (RRR). Trump has parroted the RRR’s views that there is somehow a “war on Christmas” being waged by liberals. Christian fundies get up in arms anytime someone dares to say: “Happy Holidays” rather than “Merry Christmas.” Apparently, in their deluded minds, this constitutes a war on Christmas. Although this is laughably ridiculous, Trump noted during his campaign that, in his administration, it would once again be OK to say: “Merry Christmas” as if nobody currently possesses the right to say it. One can only wonder what actions he would take if someone is caught saying: “Happy Holidays” to someone else. Will his thought police take the appropriate actions? Once again, the very real possibility of a totalitarian Christian Nazi state rears its ugly head.
Consider also the issue of the browsing history on your computer. Comcast wants Congress to allow them free access to every American’s browsing history so they can sell it to anyone willing to pay them for that information. Even more ominously, they want access to all our personal financial information as well as our social security numbers. Although president Obama instigated internet-privacy protections, Mitch McConnell (who else?) is actively seeking to push a bill through Congress that would repeal Obama’s legislation. Did the people who voted for Donald Trump do so in order to give up their privacy? One can only wonder. Once again, this piece of legislation is further proof of the Republican party’s efforts to intrude more and more into the private lives of America’s citizens, all the while claiming they are “getting government off our backs.”
Then there is the immigration issue. This is one that has gotten more media coverage than any other campaign promise, with the possible exception of the promise to repeal Obamacare. First Trump announces that he wants Mexico to pay for it—yeah, right! Then he stops discussing exactly how it will be financed. Like all of his shrill campaign promises, this one hasn’t gotten off the ground, at least as I write this. Finally he announces in July 2017 that the actual wall won’t be as long as he had originally estimated because mountains can serve as a partial barrier. But none of this means that there aren’t already negative consequences to the immigration issue. NBC News has reported that huge numbers of U.S. citizens are not only being detained at the borders, they are also being forced, without warrants, to surrender their passports, social media passwords, laptops, and cellphones to be searched by border agents. If they refuse to turn these items over, they are being illegally detained for indefinite time periods. This is un-Constitutional: the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution specifically forbids unlawful searches and seizures. Despite the clear illegality of these searches and seizures, they are occurring every day at our borders. Not surprisingly, the number of these offenses have increased dramatically during the first months of the Trump administration; an estimated five thousand searches of this kind were done in 2015, while the same amount occurred in February 2017—the first full month of the Trump presidency. Although a bipartisan bill (how rare is bipartisan cooperation these days!) written by Democratic Senator Ron Wyden and Republican Senator Rand Paul has been introduced, the fact that it is occurring at all is a telling indictment to the over-reaching influence of government on the American people. And predictably, Trump’s administration and Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly are doing their best to stonewall congressional inquiries into this most un-American intrusion into our private lives.
Donald Trump is in way over his head. Consider the words of Stuart Stevens, who served as a senior advisor to Mitt Romney during Romney’s presidential campaign in 2012. He said that Trump is: “A con man who is shocked his con hasn’t been called” and might be looking for an emergency exit. He also noted “He has no sense of how to govern. He can’t even put together a campaign.” I need only add that, as noted above, he can’t even put together a coherent sentence.
Trump’s approval of the attack on Syria (without Congressional approval, of course) accomplished little, other than to destroy a few Syrian vehicles. More importantly, it served to divert attention away from all the scandals and threats to his administration’s survival. It was only a question of time before this or some similar war-like action would have been instigated: War is always a great uniter, and Trump hopes it will be such for him. Trump’s hypocrisy is so transparent on this; back in 2012, he tweeted: “Now that Obama’s poll numbers are in tailspin –- watch for him to launch a strike in Libya or Iran. He is desperate.” It would be entertaining to watch his reaction were some enterprising journalist to ask him if he is likewise desperate. And of course, in typical Republican fashion, by the end of March, 2017, as more and more troops were being sent into Syria and Iraq, the administration stopped disclosing the number of combatants being employed in those countries, yet another departure from the Obama administration’s practices. We have already noted several instances illustrating how secrecy is all-important to Republicans. By now, it should be obvious why.
There seems to be no limit to this man’s ability and willingness to lie—and for the news media to under-report or not report it at all. Back in 2013, Trump opined on Twitter that attacking Syria would be a “big mistake.” As recently as the fall of 2016, while running for president, Trump said that bombing Syria could “very well lead to World War 3.” Yet, after his fireworks display in that country (which has accomplished nothing except to stoke the fires of global dissent), Trump said: “Look, what I did should have been done by the Obama administration a long time before I did it.”
It should also be mentioned that back in 2013 when Obama went to Congress to request military action against the Assad regime, Mitch McConnell voted no. He has been conspicuously but predictably silent this time.
Consider what the Democrats felt about supporting United States airstrikes against Syria in 2013 and in 2017, versus Republicans from the same two years. In 2013, 38 percent of Democrats favored airstrikes whereas four years later, the number was 37 percent. In 2013, only 22 percent of Republicans supported airstrikes whereas, once Trump’s administration had taken over, the number skyrocketed to 86 percent. A one percent difference versus a sixty-four percent difference. It’s not as if all these Republicans suddenly in 2017 realized that Assad was a tyrant; he was responsible for half a million deaths long before that. Can anyone in their right mind deny that the only reason the Republican numbers were so low in 2013 and so high in 2017 was because their party had taken over? This is yet another example of how the Democrats have at least some principles while the Republicans care only about keeping their party in charge. This example proves that this applies to Republican voters as well as their leaders. It doesn’t take too much analysis to reveal which is the more principled party.
But it’s not just Republican voters who are ever willing to change their positions whenever the opportunity knocks. We see that in the president himself. We don’t even need to mention Syria again; within three months into his term, Trump had already reversed himself on numerous key issues—issues that he made much noise about prior to becoming president. NATO, Russia, Chinese currency valuation: These are a few of the issues that have seen the president reverse himself on.
Trump tends to take the position of the last person he spoke to, a strategy reminiscent of George W. Bush. Anyone who takes the time to study Trump in the last year or so cannot escape the conclusion that Trump is: “…a man of impulses more than a man of doctrine, which makes his policies much more pliable than most politicians.” (Nicole Renee Hemmer, University of Virginia’s Miller Center) And, it should be added, much more dangerous.
Clearly, the man possesses few original ideas, little knowledge of current affairs, no idea of how government works and, worst of all, an absolutely megalomaniacal conviction that he is always right. This is the main reason why the White House is so factional, at a time when coherent strategy is most needed. The man who has claimed to know “more than anybody” is actually frighteningly ignorant and clueless about the things that matter most.
One interesting and rarely mentioned aspect of Donald Trump’s personality is his total lack of a sense of humor. Although he did once host Saturday Night Live (the other members of the cast disliked him immensely), any time he tries to say something funny, it comes across as forced, mean-spirited, or pre-rehearsed. Perhaps more tellingly than his lack of humor is the fact that he is utterly unable to accept any kind of criticism, no matter how well intended; he views any criticism as a personal attack to be countered rather than considered. Any examination of his infamous twitters will illustrate this. He seems not to have any appreciation for the arts (he intends to remove all funding from the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities, even though these constitute a mere .003 percent of federal spending) . The man doesn’t even possess a pet, something to cuddle and love, further evidence of a man without a conscience or heart.
The nation, in its collective stupidity and possible suicidal tendencies, has elected a man who is, in addition to being supremely ignorant, is also an ill-informed egotist who seems to be barely literate (he himself admits that he rarely reads) and who possesses absolutely no character or moral scruples. A man who said during the debates that he would imprison Hillary Clinton (and who, after his victory, did another of his famous about-faces and dropped the issue). No mention of a trial or any legal proceedings, of course. That is how dictators work. A man who boasts about fondling women. A sexual predator. A proven liar who has destroyed countless lives already and seems intent on destroying countless more. A man who, as evidenced by his appointees, will have no qualms in ushering in a new era of Jim Crow and religious totalitarianism.
And for those of us who dare to think for ourselves and disagree with what Trump and his cronies are planning to do? The next four years will be difficult, to say the least, assuming, of course, that his presidency manages to last that long. Everything that Trump and his underlings have said and done make it quite clear that anyone who dares disagree with him will automatically be labeled his enemy. And, unless checked, it will escalate from there: his personal enemies will then be re-labeled first as unpatriotic, then as enemies of the country, enemies of America and finally, as traitors. It happened in 1933 and it will happen here in the United States unless the American people raise their collective voices and put an end to this criminal’s reign of terror. Is this an exaggeration? Consider this: Interviewed by Fox News, Trump opined: “you know what we used to do in the good old days when we were a strong country—you know what we used to do to traitors, right?” So, if you are considering blowing the whistle on governmental corruption and/or waste, if you speak up or write about governmental fraud and abuses of power, if you dare to criticize Trump, his cabinet, any of his supporters, or fundamentalist religion, you will be one of those designated enemies.
What Trump wants to build is an American version of Nazi Germany wherein he will be the new fuhrer. Governmental actions will become increasingly secretive and harder to discover. Consider the case of Chelsea Manning. She exposed the abominable war crimes committed by the United States military in Iraq and Afghanistan. Among these was a video showing an Apache helicopter firing on unarmed civilians. She blew the whistle on this and other crimes, and even though no one was harmed by her revelations, she was confined to solitary confinement in an all-male military prison. The United Nations has described her treatment as “torture” and she has attempted suicide while there. Amazingly, she was even punished for the suicide attempts! Among the “justifications” for her solitary confinement is that she committed the “crime” of possessing an expired tube of toothpaste. She has been denied access to her doctors and lawyers. As unthinkable as this is, whistle-blowers of Trump’s administration can expect nothing less than what this woman, who should be hailed as a heroine rather than vilified as a criminal, has experienced. (Kurt Walters, Demand Progress, January 14, 2017) Secretive actions by the government are certainly nothing new, but torturing dissidents who expose atrocities for what they are certainly is.
To those who voted for Trump because they hate and resent the establishment, I need only point out that resentment is no excuse for electing a man such as Donald Trump. Trump’s victory is the ultimate victory of the “choose your own reality” way of thinking that obviously has become the modus operandi of most voters and elected officials, to say nothing of the American people. This is nothing more than wishful thinking and is ultimately based on mysticism and the desire to change reality to conform with what they want to believe is true. If there is one thing I’ve learned in my modest sixty-one years on this earth it is that no amount of reason can dissuade people of faith, whether it is faith in god, faith in one’s political party, faith in Reaganomics and its stupid “trickle down” theories, faith that private schools perform better than public schools, or faith that America will now magically become “great again” under Donald Trump. There hasn’t been a single week beginning in 2015 when he announced his candidacy, in which another of Trump’s lies, stupid statements, or immorality didn’t make the news, and in every single instance, his lies, errors, overt stupidity and criminality were downplayed.
LIAR IN CHIEF
The number of lies Trump has come up with are startling, and should concern every thinking American. Some of them are benign, as when he said the day after his inauguration that it: “stopped raining immediately” when he began his speech. In fact the rain continued all through his address. Others are more significant, as when he said that the rate of homicides in the United States was “horribly increasing” when in fact it is decreasing. He also lied when he said that he “didn’t want to go into Iraq” when in fact he told Howard Stern in 2002 that he supported the war there. He also justified the GOP’s refusal to consider Obama’s nominee Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court by noting that no president had ever nominated a justice so late in his term when in fact this had occurred on three previous occasions. And, of course, Trump continues to claim that he nearly lost the election because of alleged voter fraud, even though this has ultimately been proven to be false. Finally, and perhaps most significantly, Trump denied during an interview in January, 2017 that he or anyone on his campaign had any contact with Russia prior to the election. (Igor Bobic, The Huffington Post, February 28, 2017)
The Los Angeles Times ran an editorial which discussed the ramifications of all the lies emanating from the White House: “He gives every indication that he is as much the gullible tool of liars as he is the liar in chief. He has made himself the stooge, the mark, for every crazy blogger, political quack, racial theorist, foreign leader, or nutcase peddling a story that he might repackage to his benefit as a tweet, an appointment, an executive order or a policy.” (Los Angeles Times, April 4, 2017) The editorial points out how dangerous he is by noting: “He puts the nation in danger by undermining the role of truth in public discourse and policymaking, as well as the notion of truth being verifiable and mutually intelligible.” The editorial rightly notes that there is a name for people like Trump: Demagogues. It closes by noting: “Our civilization is defined in part by the disciplines —science, law, journalism—that have developed systematic methods to arrive at the truth. Citizenship brings with it the obligation to engage in a similar process. Good citizens test assumptions, question leaders, argue details, research claims. Investigate. Read. Write. Listen. Speak. Think. Be wary of those who disparage the investigators, the readers, the writers, the listeners, the speakers and the thinkers. Be suspicious of those who confuse reality with reality TV, and those who repeat falsehoods while insisting, against all evidence, that they are true. To defend freedom, demand fact.”
Perhaps the most obviously blatant lie Trump has come up with is one in which he attempts to discredit his predecessor in the Oval Office. He claimed that Obama had wiretapped his phones at Trump Tower, saying: “Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!” As usual, he offered no evidence for this accusation, and it has been dismissed, once again, as “Donald being Donald.” The obvious explanation for this nonsensical claim was that Trump was attempting to deflect attention away from the Russian scandal that has been threatening his administration. Reflecting on all this, California Democratic Senator Adam Schiff commented: “No matter how much we hope and pray that this president will grow into one who respects and understands the Constitution, separation of powers, role of a free press, responsibilities as the leader of the free world, or demonstrates even the most basic regard for the truth, we must now accept that President Trump will never become that man.” (Eli Stokols, Politico, March 4, 2017) That this was yet another lie by Trump was confirmed by FBI director James Comey on March 20 when he said: “I have no information that supports” the president’s claims on wiretapping. Finally, on March 15, 2017, a House intelligence panel, composed of both Democrats and Republicans, concluded that there was no evidence whatever that Obama had wiretapped Trump.
On May 9, 2017, Comey was fired by Trump, who claimed that removing Comey would somehow “ease” the Russian investigation against him and his administration. In typical manner, Trump referred to Comey as a “nut job.” The White House initially reported that Jeff Sessions (who else?) and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein had recommended Trump fire Comey, and Trump weakly replied that his firing came about because Comey “wasn’t doing a good job.” Translated: Comey wasn’t doing exactly what Trump wanted him to do. Two days later, Trump contradicted himself again when he said that the decision to fire Comey was his alone. Trump was Comey’s biggest fan when Comey (ever so conveniently for Trump) revealed eleven days before the election that he was reorganizing the investigation into Hillary Clinton, an action that, coupled with Russia’s collusion in the election, most likely caused Clinton to lose the election. Ironically (and obviously dishonestly), Trump said he fired Comey because his handling of the Clinton email investigation somehow damaged the FBI. If so, why did he praise Comey’s investigation, just before the election, calling it “the right thing to do?” The real reason Comey was fired should be obvious to any thinking American: When Comey announced he intended to pursue the Russian scandal, Trump sacked him. Given the most propitious timing of the firing, it doesn’t take too much imagination to sniff a major cover-up by Trump and his associates. And, if this were not enough, it was soon revealed that Trump had told Comey he wanted him to drop the investigation into Flynn. Finally, the day after a special prosecutor was named in the Russia scandal, Trump called the inquiry a “witch hunt.” In other words, trying to honesty get at the truth is a witch hunt. Welcome to Trump’s Orwellian world. Further proof of Trump’s dictatorial instincts was seen when he told Comey: “I need loyalty. I expect loyalty.” Translated: Agree with me on everything. Or else.” All this conclusively proves is that this is a gangster presidency, going from one crisis to another, crises of Trump’s own making.
Is it mere coincidence that Comey was fired just after he had requested more resources to adequately investigate the Russian interference question? Isn’t it just a little bit more of a coincidence that Trump fired the FBI director—while being investigated by the FBI? Isn’t it also convenient that the firing meant that Trump was free to hand-pick Comey’s successor? Only diehard Trump supporters can’t (or won’t) put two and two together; others have compared Trump’s actions to the famous “Saturday Night Massacre” during Richard Nixon’s presidency, when Nixon fired Archibald Cox, who had been investigating the Watergate scandal. Trump was also angry with Comey for failing to back up his claim that Obama had wiretapped his campaign offices, but Comey’s firing, at exactly the same time he had requested additional resources to expand the investigation, was seen as a hindrance to the integrity of the investigation. Trump finally admitted his real reason for firing Comey: He went on national TV and said he fired him because of the Russian scandal. Clearly, all this has the appearance of obstruction of justice, yet another impeachable offense.
Credo Action was among the first to demand that an independent, special prosecutor be appointed to investigate the Russian scandal. Quoting the New York Times, they sent out the following email: “In a scathing editorial, The New York Times editorial board did not mince words: ‘This is a tense and uncertain time in the nation’s history. [Trump], who is no more above the law than any other citizen, has now decisively crippled the FBI’s ability to carry out an investigation of him and his associates…The obvious historical parallel to Mr. Trump’s action was the so-called Saturday Night Massacre in October 1973, when President Richard Nixon ordered the firing of the special prosecutor investigating Watergate, prompting the principled resignations of the attorney general and his deputy. But now, there is no special prosecutor in place to determine whether the public trust has been violated, and whether the presidency was effectively stolen by a hostile foreign power. For that reason, the country has reached an even more perilous moment.’” (Murshed Zaheed, Credo Action, May 11, 2017)
Much to the consternation of the White House and the Republican party, the Department of Justice appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as special prosecutor in charge of the Russian investigation. And, it didn’t take long for Trump to express his displeasure. As of this writing, late in July, 2017, Mueller is still on the job, but Trump is actively seeking two things: One, to remove Mueller, and, two, to end the investigation.
After the firing, Trump went on the offensive, saying he would not back down and saying that his enemies are “entrenched interests” trying to halt his agenda. Comey fired back, accusing the president of telling “lies, plain and simple.” So who to believe? Given his multitudinous lies since time immemorial, it should be obvious to every thinking American which of the two has the credibility issue.
Shortly afterwards, Attorney General Jeff Sessions volunteered to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee which asked him many key questions about the Russia Scandal, Comey’s firing, and numerous other issues. Sessions not surprisingly defended the firing of FBI director James Comey, but also, and most conveniently, said he could not remember key information that he surely must have remembered. For example, the Los Angeles Times reported: “Sessions frequently said he could not remember details of meetings and conversations—and even could not say for certain whether he met for a third time with Sergey Kislyak, Russia’s ambassador in Washington, during a Mayflower Hotel reception in April last year. He did not rule out such a meeting but repeatedly said he did not recall one.” (Joseph Tanfani, David S. Cloud, and Noah Bierman, Los Angeles Times, June 14, 2017) Nice dancing around the truth; evasive, but saving face at the same time. A tactic totally expected by those of us following all this. Sessions did receive a few pointed questions to which he gave typically evasive answers. To cite but one example, Senator Martin Heinrich of New Mexico asked him about conversations he had with Trump, Sessions refused to answer, to which Heinrich countered: “You’re impeding this investigation!” The bottom line on Sessions’ testimony is that he admitted under oath that he had not been briefed on Trump’s conversations; he also gave the impression that he is totally uninterested in anything the Russians had done or may have done during the 2016 presidential campaign. Since he is not the president’s attorney but is supposed to be the supreme defender of the Constitution, his apathy on the ramifications of the scandal show that he is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the president and thus could be removed from office on those grounds alone.
Sessions has since found himself in hot water with Trump. This is particularly interesting and ironic because Sessions has proven himself to be one of the foremost boot-lickers in the administration. But on July 19 2017, the president attacked his Attorney General for recusing himself from the ongoing Russia election-meddling investigation. Interviewed by the New York Times, Trump said he now regrets having chosen Sessions in the first place. What this proves—again—is that no one is safe in the Trump White House, should they dare to criticize the president in any way or to act contrary to his wishes. But, more ominously, Trump’s words show that he does not understand the system of checks and balances that are supposed to make the Justice Department independent of political factions. As of this writing, Sessions has vowed to stay on the job.
To reiterate, far too many Democrats are as culpable as the Republicans for allowing this administration’s nonsense, lies and general immorality to continue unchallenged. Their attitude seems to be: Trump refused to release his income tax returns: so what? Members of Trump’s entourage colluded with Russia during the presidential campaign. Who cares? Trump destroyed emails, recordings and various documents in defiance of court orders. Big deal! And Hillary Clinton was rejected by voters because she is supposed to be dishonest? Compared to Trump? Come on! There isn’t a single charge that has been leveled at Hillary which has any foundation in fact; most notably, the FBI has exonerated her of any wrongdoing with regard to her email server. Republicans, aided and abetted by the media, made her alleged transgressions the focal point of their campaign against her. But when Trump’s Vice Presidential nominee Mike Pence announced he was going to court to keep his emails private, this was conveniently ignored and attracted little to no attention. What is he hiding?
And of course Trump’s destruction of his emails and other documents, criminal though it is, was ignored altogether by the majority of Republican leaders and their mainstream media lackeys. When Trump made a huge issue of Hillary’s alleged transgressions, he was accusing her of exactly what he had done. Repeatedly. When he destroyed his corporate records, he was doing exactly what the Nixon gang did during Watergate. So what did the mainstream media say or do about all this? Nothing. Did the Democrats say or do anything about this during the campaign? Of course not; they are always in the defensive mode. Trump has been involved in 3500 lawsuits. The records are crystal clear: Donald Trump is a criminal. Nothing less, nothing more.
And for those who happen to be women seeking an abortion, or gay, or lesbian, or Muslim, or Jewish, or atheist, or anyone else that the Republican Nationalists hate, the Trump years will be troublesome, to say the least. Their freedoms are already under siege, and the Trump government, aided by a Nationalistic Republican Congress and Supreme Court will act to remove all protections for these people. 2017 may well prove to be the next 1933. All that is needed is an American version of the Reichstag fire.
A few words need to be mentioned concerning Trump’s proposed ban on Muslims entering the country. Fortunately, courts have ruled this to be unconstitutional. But the whole point is that Trump is exploiting American fears resulting from the attacks on the Twin Towers. The simple fact is that we are in more danger from a home-grown Christian terrorist attack than we are from a Muslim attack. America’s fear of Islam extends to other areas as well, such as the fear of our laws being replaced by Sharia, the Muslim law code. This is irrational; no Muslim group in the United States has ever advocated replacing our laws with Sharia. Here in America, Christian fundamentalists are far more likely to oppose church/state separation than Muslims. Why do Muslims support separation? Simply because they recognize that it is good for their religion. If only Christian fanatics would see it the same way! It is they, not the Muslims, who pose a far greater threat to our freedoms.
Let’s have another look at environmental issues and see where the Republicans are leading us.
Now that Trump and his far-right Republican cronies control congress, the future of the environment is looking bleak indeed. They want to open up our National Parks to unregulated drilling and fracking. House Republicans wasted no time introducing a bill to that effect, a bill which would allow oil and gas drilling in over forty of our National Parks, including Florida’s Everglades National Park, Wyoming’s Grand Teton National Park, and others. Under this bill, corporate polluters could drill anywhere they like without having to inform park employees or visitors, and be unaccountable to anyone.
And of course Trump is planning on rescinding Obama’s executive order (which protects 98% of Arctic waters) to protect the waters off the northern coast of Alaska. He wants to allow Eni (an Italian oil and gas company) to drill for oil in Alaskan waters. On April 28, he announced a new order which would hand over nearly 125 million acres of Arctic Ocean to oil companies. This violates federal law and threatens endangered whales, polar bears and our climate. Trump even wants to find ways to allow for drilling in Alaska’s wildlife refugees, which have been protected for almost a century. Drilling in these protected areas would pose nearly insurmountable cleanup obstacles, in addition to threatening to drive polar bears and other wildlife to extinction.
Donald Trump Jr., no stranger to controversy, was photographed in 2012 holding up the severed tail of an elephant and a dead cheetah. Responding to rightly enraged critics, he said: “I’m a hunter. For that I make no apologies.” This should give a pretty clear picture of how he and his family view wildlife. One is reminded of Sarah Palin, John McCain’s 2008 running mate, who famously (or infamously) said caribou should “take one for the team” and die for the oil companies.
Clearly wildlife, clean air, clean drinking water, and national treasures mean nothing to Republicans; what matters is to assist corporate polluters in lining their pockets at the expense of everyone else. To reiterate, how can today’s Republicans still call themselves conservatives when they have no intention of conserving anything at all, other than their jobs?
In his inauguration speech, Trump said that: “…we are transferring power from Washington, D.C., and giving it back to you, the people.” This prompted George Skelton of the Los Angeles Times to ask: “Did that mean the federal government under Trump would butt out of California’s affairs and let its citizens determine, for example, the state’s own environmental policies?” (George Skelton, Los Angeles Times, January 23, 2017) Of course not. Every thinking American knows that Trump’s (and the Republican party’s) covert and overt advocation of state’s rights will come to a crashing halt when the people of a state act to save themselves from the dangers of a corrupt administration.
The statement that Trump’s administration is transferring power: “back to you, the people” is a joke, albeit a rather sick one. How serious can Trump be when he claimed he was acting in the interests of the American people by opening up dozens of national monuments “for review?” What he wants to do is obvious: Trump’s administration is seeking to industrialize America’s national parks and monuments. What “review” really means is that Trump is taking the first step towards opening millions of federally protected acres to drilling and fracking by big oil billionaires like the Koch brothers. Did we the people ask to cut down trees in Sequoia National Park? Did we ask for drilling or fracking in Carrizo Plain? Did we the people put in a request for pumping groundwater from underneath Mojave Trails? These are but three examples, all from California; the Sierra Club explains what this all means: “Trump has released a list of 6 iconic California national monuments up for ‘review’ under the Antiquities Act—the first step toward stripping these natural wonders of protections. The list is shocking:
(1) Berryessa Snow Mountain, CA; (2) Carrizo Plain, CA; (3) Giant Sequoia, CA; (4) Mojave Trails, CA; (5) Sand to Snow, CA; and, (6) San Gabriel Mountains, CA. The world’s largest tree. Magnificent mountain ranges. The fields that erupted into a super bloom last month. These are iconic American treasures to be respected and protected. But to Donald Trump? They’re just clumps of trees and piles of rocks, up for grabs by the highest bidder to log, drill and mine.
Trump’s devastation involves other states’ national monuments as well. If you think a treasure as great as the Grand Canyon won’t be touched, think again: This is just another treasure “up for review.” Trump is merely lying again when he says he is acting in the interests of the American people. The only beneficiaries of widespread monument destruction would be the oil, logging, and gas industries. For sure, the American people won’t support all this devastation. The above cited article by the Sierra Club also noted: “a recent poll by Colorado College showed that 80% of western voters support keeping existing national monuments protections in place.” True, but then Trump isn’t asking the American people what they want.
Americans who claimed that we need to put a “businessman” in the White House are now seeing the results of their beliefs. To be sure, most businessmen are honest and serve their customers well. But the problem is exactly that government and business are working together in a mutually beneficial manner, which only leads to further and further buyouts, sellouts, and governmental interference in the economy. Proof of this is obvious. To cite one now distant example, the government’s bailout of Chrysler back in the early 1980s. Bailing out Chrysler only served to save the jobs of the incompetent leaders who were running Chrysler. The correct course of action would have been to let it go belly up; the most likely scenario would have been for better management to move in. A more recent example is George W. Bush’s bailing out the Keating Savings and Loan scandal. Why should the American people be forced to subsidize bad and/or dishonest corporate management? The only legitimate purpose of government is to protect the people from foreign invasion and domestic violence issues, and to settle legal disputes. Neither party recognizes the proper role for government to play. Hence the situation we are now in.
Naturally, right-wing ideologues support Trump on his plans to destroy the environment, and have written some patently absurd rationalizations in his defense. Their writings and statements clearly indicate that they do not understand Constitutional law. The Property Clause of the Constitution clearly states that it is Congress, not the president, who possesses the authority over all federal property. The Antiquities Act of 1906 gives the president to protect objects of national interest; it does not give him the power to rescind the decisions of earlier presidents on this matter.
On the day of his inauguration, the Daily Kos beautifully summed up the whole situation: “Donald Trump won the White House by running the most misogynist, racist, xenophobic, and Islamophobic campaign in history. While promising to ‘drain the swamp,’ instead he’s packing his cabinet with ludicrously unqualified, extremist millionaires and billionaires. In other words, he’s stocking the swamp with alligators! He’s promised to strip 20 million Americans of their healthcare and create a more aggressive police state. He’s empowered white nationalists, incited violence, and by all indications is a puppet of the Russian government. And through it all, his dangerous rhetoric and behavior, his conflicts of interest and unfitness for office has been normalized or ignored by traditional media outlets more interested in ‘scandal’ than news.” (Markos Moulitsas, Daily Kos, January 20, 2017) A letter in the Los Angeles Times the following day echoed those sentiments: “On Friday we inaugurated as president a man who has major conflicts of interest, refuses to release his tax returns, spews lies and hateful rhetoric, disdains the press, declares NATO to be obsolete, encourages other nations to develop nuclear weapons, promotes an agenda that will make the rich richer and the poor poorer, may destroy the rights of women and minorities, could bring our nation into conflict with major world powers and(most frightening of all) destroy all efforts to protect our environment from the ravages of climate change.” (Barbara Sobin-Rosen, Los Angeles Times, January 21, 2017) Six months into his reign, these comments are more true than ever.
On the second day of his presidency, Trump lied about the crowd size at his inauguration and followed that lie with his ludicrous claims about voter fraud on his fifth day (as it turns out, his chief strategist, Steve Bannon, was registered to vote in both Florida and New York, but apparently this is OK since Bannon is “his guy,”). PolitiFact has noted that only 17 percent of Trump’s “facts” are actually true or “mainly true,” which should indicate that anything this man says should be taken with a grain of salt. Clearly, the man and his administration cohorts have no problem at all lying to the American people. And, of course, when the media dares to point out his lies (however carefully worded), Trump goes into conniption fits; within days of his inauguration, he gave another of his sweeping generalizations (read: lies) when he said that reporters: “are among the most dishonest people on earth.” Given that this is a classic example of the pot calling the kettle black, how can we possibly trust anything he says or does?
MUSLIMS, VOTER FRAUD, AND TRUMP’S BUDGET
Trump’s travel ban against Muslims foundered a week into his presidency. And, when acting Attorney General Sally Yates stated that the Justice Department would not defend his executive order which temporarily banned all refugees and other travelers from “undesirable” countries, Trump immediately fired her. A subsequent press release from the White House stated that Yates has “betrayed the Department of Justice by refusing to enforce a legal order designed to protect the citizens of the United States.” In other words, Yates was fired for questioning the legality of the order (which falls within the purview of her job description). This is yet another example of the totalitarian nature of the Trump presidency: Anyone who dares to question the almighty Trump automatically becomes his enemy and is treated accordingly. She was replaced, not surprisingly, by Jeff Sessions, a singularly undistinguished and unqualified yes-man. This is particularly ironic given that it was Sessions who asked during her own confirmation hearings how she would act if then-president Obama asked her to do something she deemed to be unconstitutional. She said she would uphold the Constitution. Clearly, upholding the Constitution is only important if the president is a Democrat. Doing the same thing for a Republican president caused her to be fired.
Between 2000 and 2014, there have been only 31 individuals who have been proven to have voted fraudulently. Yet Donald Trump, angry because he did not win the popular vote in the presidential election, has come up with the ridiculous notion that there was massive voter fraud in 2016, to the tune of somewhere between three to five million illegal votes. He of course has no evidence whatever to support this allegation, nor has anyone in his administration, but this has not stopped him from pursuing the matter. Predictably, he has made it a centerpiece of his administration, appointing Kris Kobach, Kansas’ secretary of state, to be vice-chair (Pence is the chair) of a panel investigating the issue. Not surprisingly, the commission seems to be mostly, if not exclusively, composed of members who agree with Trump’s unfounded claim. Kobach sent letters to the top election officials in each state, requesting that they supply: “the full first and last names of all registrants, middle names or initials if available, addresses, dates of birth, political party (if recorded in your state), last four digits of social security number if available, voter history (elections voted in) from 2006 onward, active/inactive status, cancelled status, information regarding any felony convictions, information regarding voter registration in another state, information regarding military status, and overseas citizen information.” (Heidi Hess, Credo Action, July 10, 2017) By July 5, at least forty secretaries of state had rejected the request or else inform the commission that state laws prevented them from releasing the data. That same day, Kobach said that these refusals were “fake news” showing again that any discomforting facts that are reported to this administration are automatically labelled fake news. These same Republicans who claim to believe in an omniscient god apparently now think themselves to be omniscient. Their arrogance knows no bounds.
The choice of Kobach to be vice chair of this commission is yet another example of putting the worst person possible in a position of authority. Tom Perez, chair of the Democratic National Committee has some harsh words about: “Kris Kobach, who has devoted his career to lying about voter fraud in order to keep African American and Latino voters from the polls. He’s been the architect of some of the most restrictive voting laws in the country. Now he’s in charge of ‘election integrity?’ Give me a break.” (Tom Perez, Democratic National Committee, May 15, 2017)
Mike Pence says the commission will work to “enhance the American people’s confidence in our electoral system.” I have news for him: The American people already have confidence in the electoral system. It is only the current administration that seems to have a problem with it. The brouhaha about election fraud is just another red herring issue designed to keep the Russian scandal at arm’s length. The Republican’s strategy is laughingly transparent. If they were really interested in making America confident of the electoral system, they would consider eliminating the electoral college.
The Los Angeles Times reported Trump, with regard to the various states’ lack of cooperation in the investigation, as saying: “If any state does not want to share this information, one has to wonder what they’re worried about. There’s something, there always is.” ( Lauren Rosenblatt, Los Angeles Times, July 20, 2017) And yet we are not supposed to wonder if there is “something” there because Trump refuses to release his tax returns? As in everything else, Trump holds himself to different standards than everyone else. Are we not supposed to wonder about a president who tries to shut down investigations into a scandal, and who fires the director of the FBI for daring to investigate that scandal? The hypocrisy of this man is truly astounding.
The commission itself is the real fraud. If Trump were correct, then this is what would have had to have happened: Between three and five million voters died, but somehow remained on the voter rolls. The Democrats then went and found millions of people to assume their identities. They then went out and voted for Hillary Clinton. And, of course, none of their neighbors, families or friends said anything about what they had done. Between three and five million people never noticed anything until Donald Trump came along. So how did he come to this conclusion? Why does he steadfastly refuse to acknowledge how he got this information?
Clearly, this entire situation is ridiculous. How likely is the scenario I just portrayed? But this is what Trump is claiming, if one reads between the lines. We, the taxpayers are being forced to fund this ridiculous wild goose chase to satisfy the fragile ego of a megalomaniacal leader.
No one should be fooled by what this commission seeks to do. It has nothing whatever to do with alleged voter fraud; it’s all about keeping “undesirable” people from voting. Kobach wants to create a federal version of the Interstate Crosscheck list which he compiled in 2016 and then passed along to other governors of red states. Republicans are well aware of a fact that is rarely discussed in today’s political scene: that their agenda, once examined, is not popular with the majority of Americans. Not only that, their plans are not even supported by the majority of their own voter base, which is why they have been hard at work trying to install regressive gerrymandering in order to help them tip elections in their favor. The last year or so has seen another effort in this direction: they are attempting to suppress voters on a massive scale. There is ample precedent for this effort: the presidential election of 2000 went to George W. Bush because Republicans were able to purge the voter rolls in Florida, a state that should have gone to his Democratic opponent, Al Gore.
If there is in fact any kind of voter fraud, it is here: The Republican party is attempting to rig the system so that voters who tend to vote Democratic are removed from the voting rosters. This is about as un-American an idea as has ever been created, yet the real goal of Trump’s phony commission remains a secret to most Americans. And, of course, is not reported by the media.
That Donald Trump is the most polarizing figure in America today was seen long before his inauguration. This was demonstrated immediately after his inauguration when more than a million Americans rallied against him in marches across the country. Several hundred thousand of these were attending the Woman’s March on Washington at the same time the new president was going through the familiar rituals of his inauguration. In Los Angeles, several hundred thousand more participated in the same march. In New York, Elena Mooney was asked why she was participating in a march there: “Because when my future grandchildren ask how we could have just let this happen I want to be able to say, ‘I didn’t!’” Never before in American history has a newly inaugurated president faced such opposition within the first twenty-four hours of his administration.
Trump’s first budget clearly showed where his allegiances lie. Sweeping cuts were made to many agencies and cabinet departments. Of course, military spending would receive a 54 billion dollar increase, a sum which is more than eleven other cabinet agencies combined. 2.6 billion dollars would go towards Homeland Security and Trump’s pet project, building a wall along the U.S./Mexico border (which, besides being unconstitutional also threatens dozens of endangered species). The budget would also remove billions of dollars in research funding aimed at fighting diseases, fighting climate change (of course), libraries, job training programs, and grants for public housing and public transit. The Los Angeles Times reported: “Proposed for elimination: at least 19 independent agencies including the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities.” (Michael A Memoli and Noah Bierman, Los Angeles Times, March 17, 2017. The article also noted that the Environmental Protection Agency would take a huge cut, and the Clean Power Plan would be completely eliminated. And, having never learned the lesson that vouchers simply don’t work, the budget would earmark 1.4 billion dollars to expand voucher programs, while cutting ten billion dollars from the Department of Education. That the president lied and broke another campaign promise was shown by the cuts in the Department of Housing and Urban Development, which of course contradicted his original pledge that he would work to improve our inner cities. The budget’s proposed health cuts would also be devastating: The National Institutes of Health, the nation’s medical research agency, will take a 5.8 billion dollar cut in fiscal year 2018. Obviously, putting the health of all Americans at risk is not a concern of the Trump administration.
Further proof of how Trump views the environment was revealed in his budget which, as reported by the Sierra Club, would make massive cuts in the following areas: “(1) EPA: Slashed by a third. (2) National Parks Service: Cut by 84%. (3) Funding for Chesapeake Bay and Great Lakes protection: Gone. (4) Clean air and climate change programs: Cut by half. (5) Radon, lead and pollution prevention, beach protection: Zeroed out.” (Michael Brune, Sierra Club, May 24, 2017) The report concludes by noting the results of this agenda: “Children will die from lead poisoning and asthma attacks; coastal economies in the Great Lakes and elsewhere will suffer spills and beach closings; wildlife will disappear forever due to deforestation and climate change.”
Not surprisingly, the EPA suffered the most under Trump’s budget. Environment America tells us just what is at stake: “Despite widespread criticism and bipartisan backlash, the president has held firm in his call to slash the EPA’s budget by 31%. That’s twice the cut of any other major federal agency. Worse still, the budget proposal cuts EPA research by 45% and eliminates certain climate programs from NOAA and NASA, setting us back decades in our progress toward clean energy and slowing down climate change…The cuts don’t stop with climate change and enforcement. Here are just a few of the programs that are targeted for defunding or crippling underfunding in the new budget: (1) RadNet, the system that detected radiation fallout on America’s shores following the 2011 Fukushima nuclear crisis. (2) Research to identify the consequences of chemicals that disrupt the endocrine system, which have been linked to birth defects and cancer. (3) The Superfund program, which pays for the cleanup of sites contaminated by hazardous substances and pollutants. (4) Regional cleanup programs for, among others, the Chesapeake Bay, the Great Lakes, and Puget Sound. We can’t protect our environment, health, and wildlife without a robust EPA.” (Anna Aurillo, Environment America, May 24, 2017)
Just imagine what could be done should the “missing” 8 trillion dollars the Pentagon “lost” should suddenly turn up. But no, the politicians of both parties will continue to ignore this elephant in the middle of the room; ignore it and the issue will somehow go away. Even if the money were suddenly found, there is no doubt where it would go, if Republicans had their way.
Clearly, Trump’s budget would be an ecological disaster unprecedented in American history. But it will also have a decidedly bad impact on most of the states in the country. For example, California governor Jerry Brown was particularly irked that the repeal of the Affordable Care Act would: “Blow a $6 billion hole in California’s budget in just three years, a significant threat to the governor’s legacy as the architect of the state’s newfound fiscal stability.” (John Myers, Los Angeles Times, March 23, 2017)
Trump’s budget would, if passed, be disastrous in another key way: It would cripple the global system that detects tsunamis. When a tsunami hit the California coast in 2011, the damage was minimal because officials had hours of warning which gave them time to evacuate areas about to be hit by the tsunami. Trump’s budget would end funding to operate the network that detects tsunamis and other weather threats.
There is another disturbing thing going on which affects California public employees. Courage Campaign provides the information: “if you’re a public employee in California, there’s a good chance your money is ending up in President Trump’s pocket. How? News just broke that the state’s pension fund (CalPERS) is invested in a real estate fund that recently bought the Trump SoHo hotel and pays millions to the Trump Organization each year to run it. 1.6 million California public employees are unwittingly sending part of their paycheck to Trump’s personal bank accounts, whether they like it or not. That’s not just outrageous—it’s unconstitutional. California’s pension fund helps provide retirement security for thousands of California employees. But we must make sure those funds are going to support working families, not Trump’s bank account. CalPERS should immediately divest from any holdings that line this corrupt president’s pockets.” (Caitlin Alesio Maloney, Courage Campaign, July 21, 2017) This is yet another example of a violation of the Emoluments clause in the Constitution, another scandal of epic proportions. I can only wonder how many of California’s public employees who voted for Trump would do so again if they knew about this.
With regard to Trump’s budget, Public Citizen summed it all up perfectly: “Let’s talk about Trump, and Public Citizen, by the numbers: (1) 131: Days since Donald Trump took office. (2) 23 million: Number of people who would lose health insurance under the Trumpcare plan. (3) $100 billion: Amount the Wall Street Journal estimates Big Banks could return to shareholders under Trump’s Dodd-Frank rollback proposals. (4) $600 million: Increase in value of Trump regulatory adviser and financial mogul Carl Icahn’s stake in the oil refiner CVR, based largely on an expectation that he will be able to push through a regulatory change of direct benefit to his company. (5) $5.5 trillion: Estimated amount of Trump’s proposed tax cuts for corporations and the superrich (high estimates hit $7 trillion). (6) $31.3 million: Amount just a single Trump tax proposal (repeal of the Alternative Minimum Tax) would have saved Trump in 2005 alone. (7) 14: Number of regulatory protections abolished by Trump and the Republican Congress using the obscure Congressional Review Act. (8) $53 billion: Trump’s proposed increase in military spending. (9) 100: Percent of budget for low-income household heating assistance that Trump’s immoral proposal seeks to cut ($3.3 billion). Here’s one more figure: $50,000. That’s the amount of money that a group of donors have pledged to match in contributions made to Public Citizen before midnight tonight.” (Public Citizen, May 31, 2017)
The final nail in the coffin of Trump’s budget plan came from the Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan entity that provides useful information to members of Congress. The CBO, after carefully considering all the ramifications of the budget, concluded that the economic forecast would mean a deficit of some $720 billion. The Los Angeles Times, reporting on this, noted: “the CBO says that Trump relies on economic growth predictions that are far too optimistic and that those rosy projections are the chief reason his budget doesn’t balance as promised.” (Associated Press report, Los Angeles Times, July 15, 2017) The CBO noted that there is a bill to repeal Obamacare without replacing it, which will be called the “Obamacare Repeal Reconciliation act of 2017.” Indeed there has been much talk of such a bill on Capital Hill of late. However, repeal without offering anything to replace it is the GOP’s most disastrous idea of all. This would destroy Medicaid and also the individual market for health insurance. The CBO estimates that some 32 million Americans will lose their coverage should this pass. The Los Angeles Times reports on the potential consequences of this action: “An almost immediate death spiral (will occur). Effective premiums would skyrocket, which means that only the sick and desperate would maintain insurance while healthy people fled the market in dries, causing prices to increaser even more.” (Scott Lemieux, Los Angeles Times, July 21, 2017) The CBO’s conclusions are crucial: As an independent entity, neither Democrats nor Republicans will be able to insist that they are biased against them. They have the authority to report the truth sans political bias, and this makes their conclusions all the more relevant. But again, Republicans who don’t like the facts will just say that all this is more “fake news.”
If Trump’s policies were fully implemented as he wants them to be, the end result would be the deaths of more Americans than all the Muslim terrorist attacks combined. The Daily Kos illustrates how: “Meals on Wheels. How far do you have to get down the scale of ideological depravity before your pen lands on Meals on Wheels as the thing you need to get rid of to buy those last two more Tomahawk cruise missiles that will finally make America a super-duper-dominant world power again. That’s only one part of the Trump budget that directly targets the poorest Americans, of course. It also cuts home heating assistance, so those same seniors will have a chance to freeze to death before starving. It takes an axe to EPA efforts to clean up pollution, which will have a disproportionate effect on the air and water of those neighborhoods surrounding those worst polluters. While that will likely result in an uptick in everything from childhood asthma to cancer, the Trump budget also slashes medical research funding in an apparent effort to ensure nobody does too much about it. And anyone so bold as to rise out of the new Trump-enforced poverty will get preemptively kneecapped by Trump’s nixing of job training efforts. (Hunter, Daily Kos, March 16, 2017)
Newly elected California Senator Kamala Harris summed up the feelings of many when, commenting on this budget, said: “At its core, this budget is a cruel betrayal of the middle class and threatens our ability to ensure basic public safety, public health, and public education. This budget makes clear the values of this Administration: it prioritizes those at the top, while leaving working families and the middle class high and dry. It reduces taxes for the wealthiest Americans while taking away Social Security for disabled Americans and tax credits for families with children. It gives corporations tax breaks while eliminating resources for students trying to pay for college. It spends billions of dollars on a wall that won’t work, while cutting access to health care and initiatives to cure cancer. I will stand up, speak out, and fight against this budget at every turn just as I will fight against this Administration’s efforts to strip health care from millions. We are better than this.” (Kamala Harris, D-CA) She went on to note the cuts the budget would mean for California: “ (1) Eliminates federal funding for 51 community action programs in California that provide thousands of low-income Californians emergency food, shelter, heating assistance, transportation and health care. (2) Reduces ‘Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act’ funding by more than $1.3 billion—resulting in more than 436,000 Californians potentially losing access to job training and employment services. (3) Cuts $357 million in Community Development Block Grants that provide California funding for affordable housing, transportation, and economic development. (4) Makes college more expensive by eliminating grants to over 201,000 California students through the Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant program. (5) Kicks 132,700 students in California off after-school programs by eliminating the 21st Century Community Learning Centers program. (6) Eliminates the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program which provides heating, cooling, or weatherization assistance to 219,000 California families. (7) Denies assistance to 23,400 California families for affordable housing which would put them at immediate risk of eviction and homelessness by slashing federal rental assistance programs, including Section 8 housing vouchers. (8) Ends the federal funding that the airports in Crescent City, El Centro, Merced, and Visalia receive under the Essential Air Service program to ensure that smaller, underserved communities have commercial air service. (9) Cuts Head Start by $101 million in California, which would throw 11,030 children off high-quality child care and early education. (10) Eliminates the Migrant and Seasonal Farmworker Training program.”
Does the Trump administration have any shame?
The United States is rapidly heading toward becoming a third world nation; the rest of the world is doing its best to ignore Trump and his dangerous policies as much as possible. Until Americans take action and until there emerges a real political party that we can trust to carry out the will of the people, nothing will change. Electing another outsider will make no difference at all: Trump’s presidency is conclusive proof of how dangerous that is. All of our European allies are terrified at what Trump’s policies mean for the future of the world. While any sensible individual recognizes that climate change threatens our survival as a species, Trump and his minions simply deny that it is occurring. They provide no facts, only denials. He appointed climate change denier Myron Ebell to his transition team. Trump’s presidency means the end of the EPA. The end of Federal Clean Energy. More drilling, more coal, more destruction of our environment. More lives and wildlife destroyed. More offshore drilling in the Arctic. Trump’s agenda is nothing less than a full-scale attack on our environment that will destroy habitats and drag this country by the scruff of the neck back to the Christian Dark Ages. And Republicans call themselves conservative? Exactly what is it that they are conserving besides their jobs and those of the polluters that support them? Reactionary is a far better word to describe them.
In his first week in office, Trump removed the words “climate change” from the official White House website, along with civil rights, and LGBTQ rights, sending a clear message that these issues are not a concern to the administration. On April 4, he went so far as to actually ban the terms “climate change” and “Paris Agreement” from staff memos and briefings! This isn’t surprising, but it does show how deranged this man actually is: he seems to think if he can eliminate discomforting terms, then the problems don’t exist. Obviously, it’s easy to deny climate change if you are making no effort to collect any information that confirms it.
A Los Angeles Times editorial on November 22, 2016, had some telling comments about the president-elect and his plans: “To see how seriously Donald J. Trump takes the health of the environment, you need look no further than his transition team’s website. Environmental issues aren’t even listed—though there is a page pledging to achieve ‘energy independence’ by opening up more sites for oil and gas drilling, magically reviving the coal industry and scrapping smokestack emissions regulations. All, of course, ‘while protecting the country’s most valuable resources—our clean air, clean water, and natural habitats.’” (Editorials, Los Angeles Times, November 22, 2016) The editorial goes on to say that, while this might not be the biggest lie he has come up with, it is a “whopper.” The bottom line is that Trump can deny climate change all he wants, but the issue is not going to go away: The fact that the world’s climate is changing due to human intervention is the overwhelming consensus of not only all respectable scientists but virtually every world leader.
The editorial goes on to discuss the 2015 report of the Pentagon, which noted that: “even resilient, well-developed countries are subject to the effects of climate change in significant and consequential ways.” Unless reversed, the end result will be a cataclysmic rise in sea levels which will affect our national security; a three foot rise in sea level would be devastating to at least 128 military bases, costing the United States an estimated $100 billion. This rise would also destabilize countries across the globe, resulting in a massive influx of immigrants to dry areas.
It should be obvious by now that Trump intends to pursue an agenda that has no problem whatever in denying basic rights to the LGBT community, or anyone else he doesn’t approve of. Early in April, Trump rescinded Obama’s executive order protecting LGBT federal employees from discrimination in the workplace. What could possibly have motivated this other than sheer hatred? And, on July 26, he announced on Twitter that he would support gender-based discrimination at the Pentagon, and that transgender people will be prohibited from serving “in any capacity” in the armed forces. And, of course this announcement was based on another lie, the claim that he had arrived at the decision: “After consultation with my Generals and military experts.” This was contradicted by the Pentagon’s press office which: “reportedly ‘didn’t know anything about’ Trump’s decision.” So we have yet another lie that the mainstream media ignored.
Does the president think that transgender individuals cannot be patriotic? Does he think that they somehow constitute a threat to the military? Does he think that bravery and courage cannot be found in the LGBTQ community? Or is he simply bigoted against that community?
To quote Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.: “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”
Trump’s stance here shows again, if further proof were remotely needed, that his is a bigoted, un-American administration that has no respect whatever for minorities. The fact that he has also ordered agencies to stop communicating with the public and with the media illustrates that he knows how unpopular his views and policies are: secrecy such as this provides us with a stark illustration of how dictatorships work.
His April executive order against the LGBT was only part of his agenda. Immediately afterward, he began his campaign to attack anyone in the scientific community who dares to speak out against fossil fuel development.
Trump is also overtly hostile to the courts, constantly cling into question the integrity of the courts and of its judges. To be sure, he wants a far-right Supreme Court, and stands a good chance of achieving it. He wants the same for the lower courts. In an editorial, the Los Angeles Times noted: “He attacked the jurists who ruled against his order excluding travelers from seven majority Muslim nations, calling one a ‘so-called judge’ and later tweeting, ‘if something happens, blame him and courts system.’” (Los Angeles Times, April 5, 2017) The editorial notes that Trump’s attacks on judicial integrity, and in particular his utterly ridiculous assertion that the judiciary should be blamed for any terrorist attacks that may occur in the future: “Aim to undermine public faith in the third branch of government. The courts are the last line of defense for he Constitution and the rule of law; that’s what makes them such a powerful buffer against an authoritarian leader.” And that is exactly why Trump hates the judiciary: it stands in the way of his burgeoning dictatorship. It also explains his political appointments: he wants to destroy any institutions that he doesn’t like or that won’t go along with him (the Department of Education, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the EPA, Planned Parenthood, etc.). At a more fundamental level, he just cannot deal with anyone who disagrees with him, one of the hallmarks of a dictator.
Trump’s hostility toward the press is unfounded, given the generally free ride the press has given him. He has shown extreme hostility when journalists dare to do their job and report on his activities, tweets, and policies. Anything he doesn’t like is automatically labeled “fake news.” The journalists reporting these stories are called “enemies of the people.” While it is certainly true that all presidents direct their wrath at the press from time to time, Trump utterly refuses to acknowledge the idea of an independent press. To him, as to all demagogues, the press exists for one purpose only: To fawn over him and unquestioningly support everything he says and does. The Times article also noted that: “On his very first day in office, he called journalists ‘among the most dishonest human beings on earth.’” The editorial also noted that: “His administration has blocked mainstream news organizations, including the Times, from briefings and his Secretary of State chose to travel to Asia without taking the press corps, breaking a long time tradition. Since the First Amendment specifically protects Freedom of the Press, it is obvious that Trump has a problem with the First Amendment. A perusal of the Constitution and Bill of Rights will disclose quite a few other issues at odds with Trump’s America.
Trump’s attacks on the courts and the media only serve to undermine democracy and it’s means of support. These institutions will not accede to Trump’s demagoguery and will fight back. But Trump’s words are not directed at them; they are directed to the American public, the sole intent being to make his countrymen increasingly less and less confident in the efficacy and even honesty of those institutions. Words have power, and a demagogue like Trump is well aware of that fact. He wants us to be forced to choose between him and those institutions, so rest assured the tweets and nonsensical hatred spewing forth from him will continue to find a willing audience. This is why I have, during the course of this article, constantly referred to him as a dictator, or a dictator-in-waiting.
Social Security is of course on the cutting block of Trump’s budget. The first thing to remember is Trump’s campaign promise not to touch Social Security. Now he is attempting to cut it off at its source. Yet another lie. Trump’s Budget Deputy has made it a top priority to destroy something that millions depend on. According to Credo Action: “Trump’s tax reform proposal would reportedly eliminate most of the employee contributions to Social Security and replace the funding with general revenue. This seemingly simple change would make Social Security funding part of the regular budget process, leaving it subject to benefit cuts and other attacks each year at the hands of the right-wing extremist Republicans who currently control Congress.” (Credo Action, April 18, 2017) He also wants to raise the retirement age to 70. Would that Trump, who is now 71, applied this to himself! As I write this, budget negotiations are being discussed in Congress. None of this is new to Republicans; they have been trying to destroy Social Security for years. However, now that they have all but total control of the major branches of government, their dreams could easily become reality.
There is seemingly nothing that the Republicans, now that they are calling the shots, are not hell-bent on destroying. An article by the Economic Policy Institute took issue with yet another detrimental piece of proposed legislation: “Republicans in Congress are offering working people a false choice between time off and money. What they’re really doing is stealing overtime pay from working families. The “Working Families Flexibility Act” (HR 1180)―also referred to as the comp time bill―would erode basic overtime protections for working people. The bill would allow employers to delay paying any wages for overtime work for as long as 13 months. Most low or moderate wage working people, whose paychecks are not enough, would always prefer to work extra hours to receive extra pay. Under comp time, these employees give up their right to overtime earnings in exchange for the promise of future time off (but with no guarantee of taking leave when they need it).” (Heidi Schierholz, Economic Policy Institute, April 18, 2017) All this bill would do would be to reduce workers pay without any guarantee of future time off. In other words, another Republican scam.
TRUMP’S BETRAYAL OF THE WORKING CLASS
We have already discussed the fiduciary rule. Here are some other examples showing how Trump favors corporations over working people:
*Hiding fatal injuries. Trump has indicated that he would support a resolution allowing employers to cover up or hide fatal injuries that occurred at their place of work. This would allow employers to lie about the injuries in their reports which would, of course, reduce their liabilities when their employees suffer fatal injuries.
*Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces rule. This rule, written during Obama’s administration, was killed by Trump on March 27, 2017. This rule required that companies desiring to obtain government contracts disclose dangerous workplace violations, as well as the companies refusal to pay their workers. Here, Trump is siding with disreputable private contractors over their more scrupulous peers, to say nothing of his turning his back (again) on working people.
*Silica Rule. Trump has targeted the Silica Rule, which protects construction workers from inhaling potential lethal dust during their job performance.
*Mining safety. Trump has also targeted a rule that requires mining companies to inspect worksites and to record and keep records of any violations and hazards they find.
It is obvious from the above that the Trump administration will continue to support businesses who cheat their employees out of their wages, and fail to provide them with safe working conditions.
Wall Street banks and CEOs manage to avoid paying countless billions of dollars in taxes every single year. How have they managed to do this? Because their lobbyists wrote the laws which favor a rigged tax system that benefits them at the expense of everyone else. Not content with this, Republicans are entertaining new laws that give them even more tax exemptions. One guess who the burden will fall on. The Daily Kos exposed just how bad the situation is about to become: Trump’s tax plan will slash the corporate tax rate from 35% to just 15% which will save the six largest banks in the country a combined twelve billion dollars per annum. Even worse, banks that make huge profits overseas will be allowed to bring those profits home at a fraction of the price; the same six largest banks will save another 25 billion dollars in tax freebies. Finally: “Hedge fund managers and Wall Street CEOs would see a two-thirds cut in their individual tax rates―equaling a $1.5 trillion tax giveaway mostly to Wall Street billionaires and the richest 1 percent.” (Daily Kos, April 21, 2017)
If this were not enough, at this writing (late July, 2017) Wall Street lackeys in the Senate and House are working furiously to turn back they clock by making it legal once again for banks to avoid accountability whenever they cheat their customers. This is the famous “ripoff clause,” which basically allows banks to steal from their customers—and never be held accountable in a court of law. This clause was written by Wall Street lawyers and put in fine print in bank account and credit card contracts. The end result is that cheated customers could not seek satisfaction in our courts. The customer is forced to enter “arbitration” which allows the company to choose who makes the ruling. It shouldn’t come as a surprise who wins the ruling almost 100 percent of the time. As unbelievable, immoral and illegal as this is, Republicans are trying to get a vote on this before the word gets out to the general public and people have a chance to mobilize against it. The ripoff clause was a major factor in the Wells Fargo fake accounts scandal; although Wells was found guilty, the amount of money they scammed from their customers turned out to be far greater than the amount returned to them.
There seems to be no end to the lies, corruption, scandals and betrayals in this administration, or in the Republican party. Public Citizen has come up with one of the most extreme examples, which: “involves financial mogul Carl Icahn, who Trump named as his special regulatory adviser. In this role, Icahn’s top priority seems to be changing biofuel rules in ways that will advantage a refining company he controls, CVR Energy. The value of Icahn’s shares in the company have jumped hundreds of millions of dollars in anticipation of his winning the policy changes he seeks. Icahn and his company have failed to register as lobbyists. We filed a request for investigation into whether Icahn and CVR are violating the Lobbying Disclosure Act. Within hours, Icahn had attacked us in The Hill, a Washington, D.C.-based newspaper and website, for carrying out a ‘witch hunt.’” (Robert Weissman, Public Citizen, May 6, 2017) The article then notes: “Besotted by their own incompetence, Trump administration operatives trip over themselves daily. But for all the talk of internal divisions and backstabbing, they remain focused on advancing an extremist corporate agenda that would unshackle corporations from standards of decency, rain trillions of dollars in tax cuts and subsidies on giant businesses, and leave our nation more dangerous, more polluted, more unequal and more unjust.”
In February 2017, Republicans were able to pass a measure that eliminates the Stream Protection Rule, which was promulgated to protect streams from contamination by dirty coal mining practices. In addition to this being yet another action designed to assist corporate polluters, it also illustrates how Christian Nationalist Republicans hope to destroy our planet in order to pave the way for their alleged savior to return and rescue us from our own excesses. Armageddon—the desire for the “end times”—is for them a reality they desperately want to achieve.
Where are the real conservatives, who seek to actively conserve, men like Theodore Roosevelt who, as president, set aside thousands of acres of natural flora and fauna to be enjoyed by succeeding generations? In their place, we have today’s Republicans who, without a single exception, want to give the green light to their corporate buddies so they can destroy what little remains of these natural national treasures. Case in point: Within two weeks of Trump’s inauguration, Florida’s Republican Matt Gaetz introduced a bill to completely dismantle the EPA, which of course would give big corporate polluters a free hand to pollute everything; our air, water, and our health would not be a factor as our environment is slowly and methodically destroyed—all in the name of “making America Great” again.
Trump became president even though he lost the popular vote by an estimated three million votes. This victory would not have been possible were it not for the active collusion of his supporters (and possibly Trump himself) with the Russian government. We may therefore conclude that Donald Trump is not a legitimate president, and the American people should be taking to the streets demanding his resignation. Trump currently has the lowest approval rating of any president since polling began. The White House has lost all credibility. And Democrats are still stalling rather than doing anything about it.
I must also point out the shocking lack of civility being displayed since Trump assumed office not only by ordinary citizens, but by political leaders as well. One well-publicized incident was when Greg Gianforte, a Republican (what else?) governor of Montana, body-slammed a reporter from The Guardian and broke his glasses. Gianforte of course denied having done so, but there was this inconvenient matter of an audiotape that confirmed the reporter’s allegations. Gianforte was sentenced to perform forty hours of community service, twenty hours of anger management, and was given a 180 day deferred sentence along with a $300 fine and $85 court fee. This incident is far from being unique; it is simply one of many manifestations of the climate of fear and press intimidation Trump’s administration has created. A Los Angeles Times editorial listed several other examples of the tendency toward violence we are seeing in our elected officials. One of these concerned Texas Republican Matt Rinaldi who, when confronted by a democratic legislator who: “Told Rinaldi he would ‘get’ him on his way to his car, and Rinaldi responded: ‘I’ll put a bullet in your head.” (Los Angeles Times, June 4, 2017) The editorial goes on noting: “In an entirely separate incident a few days earlier, Texas Governor Greg Abbot held up a target he had just riddled with bullets at a gun range and said: ‘I’m gonna carry this around in case I see any reporters.’ This particular comment was generally ignored having occurred a day after a much-publicized incident in which a congressional candidate in Montana (another Republican, of course) was accused of wrestling a journalist to the ground.
IS WAR IN OUR FUTURE?
It is always difficult to predict the future, but consider this: As I write this, at the end of July, 2017, Donald Trump’s approval rating is somewhere around 35 percent. The numbers are even lower on specific issues, such as repealing the Affordable Care Act and ending Net Neutrality. Let’s look back at recent history to see what the future might hold for us and his administration.
The Daily Kos summarized the situation succinctly and accurately: “In September of 2001 the Administration of George W. Bush was running into trouble. A President who had lost the popular vote, installed into office only through a hotly contested Supreme Court decision, had nonetheless behaved from the start as if he possessed a mandate, eagerly dismantling his predecessor’s achievements and trying to turn the country on a hard rightward course, following a strategy that had been carefully concealed from the public during the campaign. The public reaction was swift and negative—Bush’s own popularity tanked precipitously as the public reacted to an agenda most had not realized they had voted for. Prior to September 11th his approval levels had dropped to the lowest of his still-young Presidency. All of that was transformed in a matter of hours, as the nation witnessed the worst terror attack America had ever experienced. Before the rubble had even been sifted to identify the bodies, Bush’s popularity skyrocketed to 90%. Within a matter of weeks he began the process of lying us into an unnecessary war—not against Al-Quaeda or Osama bin Laden who had orchestrated the attacks, but against Saddam Hussain!—that had been planned prior to the attacks, using those same attacks as his justification. That war destabilized the entire Middle East and resulted in hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of pointless deaths. Meanwhile, here at home, dissent was shouted down as unpatriotic. The Right Wing media outlets labeled protesters as traitors, and nearly all the so-called conventional news sources either abetted or encouraged the Administration’s efforts. Bush’s administration soon instigated torture as an accepted practice, threw out the Geneva conventions, and instituted a web of foreign and domestic surveillance, the parameters of which are still undisclosed. Despite the fact that we were spending a trillion dollars for war, massive tax cuts were instituted benefitting only the wealthy.” (Dartagnan, Daily Kos, February 10, 2017)
The connection should be obvious; Trump and his theofascist cohorts, typical Republicans that they are, are following the same strategy. The recent illegal bombings of Syria, coupled with all the subsequent war talk emanating from the White House clearly indicate that Trump intends to jump-start his presidency by the old tried-and-true method of starting a war and then urging everyone to rally around the flag. And, Trump has repeatedly stated his views on torture: It works, and even if it doesn’t, use it anyway. With this kind of un-American and blatantly immoral thinking coming from the president, it is no stretch of the imagination to think that law enforcement officers and officials will, in the foreseeable future, no longer be obligated to operate under legal constraints; torture may once again become as commonplace as it was during the pre-Enlightenment era. If so, rest assured that it will be freely implemented against those Trump considers to be his enemies. Donald Trump not only is a man utterly incapable of distinguishing between his own self-interest and that of the country’s, he is a medievalist seeking to drag the United States by the scruff of the neck back to the halcyon days of the Christian Dark Ages when faith and torture reigned supreme. Even more disturbingly, polls now show that over half of Americans favor the use of torture.
Credo Action gives us some valuable information about Trump and torture memo author Steven Bradbury: “Trump has nominated Bush-era torture policy architect Steven Bradbury as general counsel for the Department of Transportation. While serving as the lead attorney for George W. Bush’s Department of Justice, Bradbury wrote three secret opinions on the CIA’s use of ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’—also known as the ‘torture memos.’ Thanks in large part to his work, the CIA retained authority to torture prisoners up until President Obama shut down the program in 2009. The CIA is not above the law, and neither is Donald Trump. Trump may want to hire lawyers who are willing defend limitless powers for the executive branch, but Bradbury’s justification of torture shows exactly why such power is so dangerous. During his time in the Bush administration, Steven Bradbury gave the legal thumbs-up to a harrowing list of torture methods—waterboarding, nudity, striking prisoners, exposure to extreme temperatures, dousing with cold water, sleep deprivation for more than seven days, cramped conditions and using these tactics in combination. While the military has a longstanding prohibition on torture, Bradbury concluded its policies didn’t apply to the CIA. His decisions were later overturned, and the Department of Justice’s ethics office would later issue a report citing serious concerns about some of his analysis. Trump might think the public won’t notice if he sneaks Bradbury into an agency mostly unrelated to his prior work. But this attempt to rehabilitate Bradbury and allow him back into public service is not acceptable. No one who promotes and defends torture is qualified to work in our government.” (Brandy Doyle, Credo Action, July 8, 2017)
There is no doubt that Trump seeks to destroy the Constitution altogether. And, he predictably contradicted himself on his first hundred days in office, first claiming that no administration had accomplished as much, and then blaming the U.S. Constitution for his many failures. In an interview with Fox News, he called the Constitution “archaic” and that the laws keeping his unconstitutional edicts from being implemented are “a bad thing for the country.” Yet this is the same president who proclaimed May 1 “loyalty day.” Obviously, loyalty to himself is the only type of loyalty that matters to Trump. If the Constitution gets in his way of starting a war, then the Constitution be damned.
A war under Trump would be even more devastating than Bush and Chaney’s criminally illegal war. Granted, Bush possessed enough information prior to 9/11 to have thwarted the attacks, but at least he did not instigate the attacks; rather, he misused them to instigate war on another front. Trump, with his hare-brained ideas, twisted sense of values and general immorality, will not hesitate to use force against anyone, anywhere, at anytime. Anyone who still thinks the majesty of his office will finally dawn on him and he will tone down his actions, has simply not been paying attention since January 20; the man is an emotional child and reacts as an emotional child would be expected to act. He is intentionally provoking just about everyone; he is even attacking the (supposedly) independent judiciary. That same judiciary was able to put the brakes on Bush’s war, but Trump’s paranoia is so extreme that he wants to stifle, if not eliminate outright, any voices of dissent. He does not believe in the Constitutional separation of powers; he wants it all for himself. He is acting in a manner that indicates he wants a war, saying cynically that when it happens, he will not be responsible for the “attack” on America. His statements and actions are exactly like those of every dictator in history; he wants to bring a calamitous war to this country so he can personally profit from it and assume absolute control—over everything and everyone. And rest assured that if and when this transpires, the Republicans will unhesitatingly rally behind him: War is a perfect excuse to eliminate civil liberties.
Even though the CIA determined that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election, that agency will also no doubt fall under the sway of Trump once the new war is instigated. President Harry Truman, who began the Agency in the aftermath of the Second World War, did so solely to solve disputes about contrary information from other agencies. He later wrote: “I never had any thought that when I set up the CIA that it would be injected into peacetime cloak and dagger operations.” Since its creation the CIA has been involved in countless undercover operations, including governmental overthrows, interference in elections, support of terrorist activities and organizations, all the while remaining immune from independent investigations. It is not unlike the Praetorian Guard of the ancient Roman Empire, which was supposed to watch and protect the emperor. But, with no one to watch over the Praetorian Guard, the Guard was, exactly like the CIA, able to engage in numerous cloak-and-dagger activities, many of which resulted in the death of the emperor. With a constant flow of money flowing into its coffers, all of it unaccounted for, the CIA has free reign to engage in any covert operations it deems to be important; the American people have no say in its operations and the agency remains completely unaccountable to the people it is supposed to be serving. The Agency’s attacks on foreign governments and their people backfire every time. Is it time to disband the CIA? Only the American people can answer that question. If they do, rest assured that the Republicans will do all in their power to keep it intact, and even expand its powers.
THE CURRENT STATE OF AFFAIRS
Paranoia is a key factor in understanding the mindset of Donald Trump. Consider the following article posted by the executive director of Daily Kos: “So late this afternoon the phone rang at my office — the Hamilton County Democratic Party in Cincinnati OH. The caller asks for me by name. I’m the Executive Director so usually its me answering the phone. He quickly rattles his name off and says he represents the Citizens for Trump Foundation. He tells me “we have been monitoring your social media accounts and you have been posting many things critical of Donald Trump.” I say yea. Do you have any idea who you just called? He says: “Don’t you want to make America Great Again”? I ask again and ask him who he is. He says: “you need to cut it out or we’ll have to do something.” I ask again who he is and his response is: “you have been warned” and he hangs up. Now in 10 years I’ve taken a lot of crank calls, people who disagree. This was different. Polished, professional, I was just someone on the list. This was no crank call.” (celebfaux, Daily Kos, April 14, 2017) The only disagreement I have with the article is the conclusion: it was a crank call. Anybody who is still supporting Donald Trump after all the damage he caused in the first three months as president (when the article was written) can only be labeled a crank.
Robert Reich, who served as Secretary of Labor during Bill Clinton’s presidency, re-visited Washington recently to ascertain the current state of affairs. He made numerous salient points. Here is his twitter:
“I spent much of this week in DC – talking w/ friends, former colleagues, pundits, and members of Congress in both parties. My verdict:
1. Washington is more divided, angry, bewildered, and fearful—than I’ve ever seen it.
2. The angry divisions aren’t just Democrats versus Republicans. Rancor is also exploding inside the Republican Party.
3. Republicans (and their patrons in big business) no longer believe Trump will give them cover to do what they want to do. They’re becoming afraid Trump is genuinely nuts, and he’ll pull the party down with him.
4. Many Republicans are also angry at Paul Ryan, whose replacement bill for Obamacare is considered by almost everyone on Capitol Hill to be incredibly dumb.
5. I didn’t talk with anyone inside the White House, but several who have had dealings with it called it a cesspool of intrigue and fear. Apparently everyone working there hates and distrusts everyone else.
6. The Washington foreign policy establishment — both Republican and Democrat — is deeply worried about what’s happening to American foreign policy, and the worldwide perception of America being loony and rudderless. They think Trump is legitimizing far-right movements around the world.
7. Long-time civil servants are getting ready to bail. If they’re close to retirement they’re already halfway out the door. Many in their 30s and 40s are in panic mode.
8. Republican pundits think Bannon is even more unhinged than Trump, seeking to destroy democracy as we’ve known it.
9. Despite all this, no one I talked with thought a Trump impeachment likely, at least not any time soon — unless there’s a smoking gun showing Trump’s involvement in Russia’s intrusion into the election.
10. Many people asked, bewilderedly, “How did this [Trump] happen?” When I suggest it had a lot to do with the 35-year-long decline of incomes of the bottom 60 percent; the growing sense, ever since the Wall Street bailout, that the game is rigged; and the utter failure of both Republicans and Democrats to reverse these trends—they give me blank stares.”
Reich also noted: “The question is no longer whether there are grounds to impeach Trump. The practical question is whether there is the political will.”
So who is going to do something about this abominable state of affairs? Who is going to show “the political will” and begin the impeachment hearings to rid this country of this horrible man and his theofascist cohorts?
The politicians are doing nothing. The media either will continue to support Trump, his cabinet and their policies outright, or else just pass them off with only a few counter-voices being heard. It is up to the American people: We must act to remove this most corrupt of men from office and admit our collective mistake on voting him in. Until we do this, our country is doomed. Since the first day of his inauguration, there have been rallies against Trump. It is now time to take the protests to the next level and start working at the local levels; we must demand that our congressmen and representatives do their duties and start representing the will of we, the people.
Fox News released the results of a poll undertaken to ascertain the level of dissatisfaction the American people have with Trump. The categories were: the economy; immigration; North Korea; Syria; Iran; Russia, and health care. The results show that more Americans disagree than agree with Trump’s handling with every single topic! Coming as it did from ultra-right wing Fox News, this is a strong indication of the American people’s dissatisfaction with Trump’s presidency.
Trump supporters, when confronted with anything negative about their hero, will invariably respond with their favorite three word justification: “Yes, but Hillary…” This just doesn’t cut it any more, if it ever did. It is not about Hillary Clinton. It is time for Trump’s supporters to move on past Hillary and face the brute fact that Donald Trump is, six months into his presidency, already being called the worst president in United States history. Let them deny the truth; the real Americans are those who are not blinded by stubborn party ideology, but instead are able to see past what they want to believe to be true and recognize the facts, however discomforting they may be.
Trump has long been famous for his tweets, which have served to divert attention away from his actions. The media have generally fallen for his strategy and reported these silly tweets and, by doing so, have avoided talking about the real issues facing our country. His tweets are a mere diversion: if we are to restore our collective American identity, the real issues I have discussed must be recognized and addressed. The media must begin doing its job, without fear of repercussions from a totalitarian administration.
Who are the real heroes in America? It is the people who have fought for their rights and the rights of others. The civil rights marchers were heroes. The women fighting for the right to vote were heroes. Farm workers, the LGBT community, the KKK resisters, the atheists fighting against religious bigotry, and many others all helped to make America great. The Founding Fathers were heroes. Dr. Martin Luther King was a hero. Elizabeth Warren is a hero for her uncompromising honesty, rare for anyone today, let alone a twenty-first century politician. Sally Yates is a hero because, although her term as Attorney General was brief, she refused to enforce an unconstitutional order which ultimately cost her her job. These and many others are the true American heroes.
Yet the current administration, as well as far too many Americans, want to turn the clock back to earlier times, when people allegedly “knew their place” and people were afraid to speak up for what was right. If America truly wants to be great again, as Donald Trump promised in his campaign slogan, they must begin by getting rid of this ridiculous political amalgamation known as the Christian Nationalists. They can and must be exposed for what they are, and one of the best ways to do it is—to laugh at them! Laughter really is the best medicine.
Sean Spicer’s resignation on July 21, 2017, was interesting in many respects. In announcing his departure, Spicer said it had been “an honor and a privilege” to serve the president. Then why the departure? The real reason isn’t hard to fathom: The paranoid president is increasingly under fire on many different levels, but most notably because of the Russian scandal, which has led him to increase the demands on his staff. According to the Los Angeles Times, Trump: “has complained, openly at times, at what he sees as the inability of his communications team to counter the steady drip of damaging headlines—though often Trump provokes such coverage by his own actions or remarks.” (Noah Bierman and Brian Bennett, Los Angeles Times, July 22, 2017)
Spicer’s resignation was followed by the departure a week later of another key White House official when Reince Priebus, Trump’s chief of staff, was forced to resign his post. This serves as another example of a White House torn by infighting and uncertainty resulting from the unpredictable behavior and actions of a president whose only loyalties are to himself and his family.
On the same day of Spicer’s resignation, the Los Angeles Times covered another story, one that could have major constitutional ramifications. On that day, for the first time, the issue of presidential pardons came up. While executive pardons are not uncommon, the situation now is notably different. Not only does it involve Trump pardoning anyone connected to the Russian scandal, or anyone else he wants, the issue is even being raised whether Trump can legally—pardon himself! As outrageous as this is, legal scholars are at work investigating the possibilities; no president has ever tried to pardon himself. Common sense, as well as the Constitution, informs us that one person issues a pardon, and a second person accepts it. But when has common sense ever reigned in this president? The other key point is this: If Trump is innocent, as he (of course) claims, why should he suddenly do an about-face and admit his guilt by pardoning himself? Doing so would be tantamount to admitting that the alleged “witch hunt” wasn’t a witch hunt at all. As I finish writing this, at the end of July, this issue is very much on everyone’s mind; it remains to be seen what this singularly unstable man will do. However, even if he is successful in pardoning himself (which would amount to political suicide), that still would not stop either the investigation of the Russian scandal, or the impeachment hearings. (Kurtis Lee, Los Angeles Times, July 22, 2017) Nonetheless, the following day Trump said that he has “complete power to pardon.” Again, why would he bring this up if he and/or his cronies were innocent in the Russian scandal?
Paul W. Kahn, a professor of law and humanities at Yale Law School, had this to say about “The President’s dangerous endgame” (the title of his article): “To avoid impeachment, Trump will have to invoke yet more powers of the presidency. Here, the nation’s future looks dark. Trump can divert attention from impeachment to a national security crisis. As president, he has extraordinary power to deploy the military. He already has attacked Syria with no authorization from Congress. In this respect, too, we have a pretty good idea of what he might do: attack North Korea.” (Paul W. Kahn, Los Angeles Times, July 24, 2017) Kahn’s scenario is exactly the kind of scenario I discussed earlier. He then pointedly asks: “Is it really possible that Trump would put the lives of hundreds of thousands of Koreans in jeopardy for the sake of his own position? Would he risk a nuclear confrontation with China for personal reasons? To ask the question is to answer it. A man with no sympathetic imagination, a man whose narcissism knows no bounds, will be guided by only one thing: what is good for the Trump family. Of course, Hillary Clinton was right that such a person should never have control of the nuclear codes. Only willful blindness could keep even his supporters from acknowledging this now. We have no evidence whatsoever of the president exercising self-control. No evidence that he can separate the personal from the political. No evidence that he cares about innocent people abroad.” To keep this from happening, Kahn concludes by noting: “Congressional leadership should be considering all of this long and hard right now. If Trump is to be stopped, legislators need to tell him in no uncertain terms that any move in the direction of this endgame will trigger impeachment.” Stark testimony—which we cannot afford to ignore.
CONCLUSION
The main problem with Donald Trump is Donald Trump himself. This is a man so self-absorbed that he can’t take criticism of any kind and lashes out like an immature schoolboy at any perceived slights. This is a man utterly determined to destroy anyone or anything that he thinks stands in his way. He is so completely removed from reality that he seems utterly incapable of distinguishing truth from falsehood. His outright lies are becoming the stuff of legend; truth is a concept totally foreign in his makeup. Any objective fact he doesn’t like is automatically labeled “fake news.” His disdain for truth is already poisoning the body politic and a new generation of future leaders: If the president can claim lies to be true, why can’t anybody else do the same? He has denied that John McCain (a fellow Republican) is a war hero. He claimed that tenor Luciano Pavarotti “is a great friend of mine”—even though he died ten years ago. Less amusing and far more dangerous is the fact that he is a supreme egomaniac so utterly obsessed with his own self-worth and self-image that it is impossible to predict how his conceit will affect the country. He has surrounded himself with a bunch of dangerous loonies whose sole purpose is to destroy the agencies they have been appointed to protect. He has shown extreme nepotism in appointing family members to key positions in the White House. He has no regard for civil liberties or individual rights. Democracy means nothing to him. He wants to eliminate the U.S. Constitution; it stands in the way of what he wants to do. He has no regard for the health of the citizens of the country he is leading. His administration poses the gravest of threats to our national monument, parks, and treasures. He has no use for science. He is a man who admits that he almost never reads and gets most of his information from television. He lashes out at journalists who are merely doing their job and reporting what he is saying and doing. He has called the media the enemy of the people. He has contempt for the rule of law and for ordinary human decency. He has made degrading comments about women. By his example, he is encouraging Americans to ignore and even disdain objective facts, disregard science and scientific evidence, and encouraging an atmosphere of civil disobedience wherein polite discourse and differences of opinion have been replaced by insults, screaming, and utter disdain for anyone having a different viewpoint. He is ever-willing to go along with crackpot alt-right conspiracy theories and has no problem appointing avowed racists to key government posts. The wildest, most harebrained schemes are accepted and acted on in his administration. He attempts to divert attention from the sewer that is his administration by tweeting lies that have no basis in fact, such as the “election fraud” nonsense. He turns a Boy Scout Jamboree into a political affair during which he attacks his opponents and defends his actions—after first telling the Scouts he would “leave the policy fights in Washington”—rather than talking about the Scout organization. He compliments and cozies up to tyrants and dictators while marginalizing, ignoring and alienating our allies such as NATO, showing that he cannot distinguish between friends and enemies. He is the first president in thirty years to refuse an invitation to an NAACP convention. His authoritarian nature, coupled with his belief that he is above the law, are more and more evident every day as he seeks to take the idea of “executive privilege” far beyond its original intention. An infantile hothead such as Trump may easily lead us into war with China, Iran, Syria, North Korea, or anywhere else as yet unforeseen. His proposed Muslim ban has been ruled unconstitutional. He refuses to release his tax returns, as every president in the last forty years has done. His refusal to put his businesses in a blind trust is a scandal in itself. He has stuck the American people with a bill of $30 million for protection, travel, and vacations—far higher than any previous administration’s expenses, and this was only in his first three months of office. Because of his refusal to separate his business dealings with the presidency (in direct violation of the Constitution), taxpayers are being forced to pay for his business expenses. He eliminated a rule that kept companies from obtaining federal contracts if it was found that they were violating wage, safety, or labor laws. His economic policies threaten our health, our livelihoods, our environment, and the vanishing wildlife in our national parks. He wants to destroy all programs that assist the needy, and give the richest Americans ever greater tax breaks. His actions are allowing businesses to begin polluting our waters unchecked. He and his administration are completely hamstrung over healthcare. He is trying to dismantle open Internet protections. He has no problem putting our citizens’ lives in danger by proposing massive cuts to the U.S. Agency for International development and other groups whose livelihood depends largely on federal grants. He also has no problem allowing Wall Street to rip off consumers. He will do nothing to protect workers from exploitation. He has done nothing to counter-act the dramatic rise in hate crimes since his presidency began. He constantly exploits the fears and superstitions of our citizens. He wants to destroy the wall between church and state that has served both so well. His administration team (and possibly Trump himself) violated the law by allowing a foreign power to influence the presidential election. His ongoing war with a free press has led him to threaten to change libel laws so that he can sue the media should they report on him negatively. He hasn’t come up with one single act that will benefit anyone other than fellow millionaires/billionaires, dirty fuel magnates, and big business tycoons. Finally, knowing his agenda does not sit well with most Americans, most of his actions have taken place behind closed doors. Six months into his presidency, this man has a lower approval rating than any other administration since polling began. Can any sensible person wonder why?
Having duly noted all the evils that the Trump administration poses for every individual, our country, and the planet itself, let us close with a positive note from the Sierra Club, dated December 23, 2016: “There are some things Trump cannot change: He can’t change the fact that as the world is heating up, and so is our response. He can’t change that clean energy sources are outcompeting dirty fuels like coal, gas, and nuclear power. He can’t stop us in the cities and states that will adopt commitments to 100 percent clean energy. He can’t change that, even during the Bush administration, with your help we stopped 184 dirty coal power plants from being built. He can’t stop private-sector partners that continue to join us in supporting clean energy and smart transportation.” Trump’s presidency, six months in as I write this, has already proven to be the worst in American history. Never before have we faced total annihilation in the hands of a maniac like Trump. It is time for real Americans to take back their country. We must agitate, agitate, agitate. We must take to the streets. We must petition our congressmen and other elected officials. We have to turnout for elections. We must write letters to the editor. We must demand that the courts eschew partisan politics and do their job objectively. The time is now for all of us to stand up for what is right and say—enough. If we fail to do so, we have no one to blame but ourselves if there is no tomorrow.
Categories: Political Affairs