bureaucracybusters

Posts Tagged ‘CHRIS MATTHEWS’

AMERICA’S LENIN, AMERICA’S STALIN

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on October 27, 2025 at 12:05 am

On February 6, 2011, Ronald Reagan, if he had been alive, would have been 100 years old.

Publishers rushed to put out worshipful tributes to his eight years as President. Network political programs such as “This Week” and “Meet the Press” assembled surviving members of his administration to re-live the “glory days” of Reagan’s—and their—time in power.

Actually, it was during the Reagan administration that America entered its decline—a Right-wing legacy of huge Federal deficits, tax-cuts for the rich, bloated military budgets and cutbacks in government programs to aid the poor and middle-class.

Ronald Reagan

No two men could have been more different than Vladimir Lenin and Ronald Reagan. Lenin created the Soviet Union in 1917 and became its first in a series of absolute dictators. Reagan spent his life fighting Communism, most notably as President.

So it’s ironic that both men, in death, got essentially the same funeral—and for the same reason: To sanctify and legitimize their respective organizations—and the authority of their potential successors.

Vladimir Lenin

Lenin died on January 21, 1924, and was immediately succeeded by the party’s General Secretary, Joseph Stalin. Stalin, as a youth, had been a seminary student. He knew that, despite Communism’s official atheistic stance, most Russians remained loyal to the Russian Orthodox Church.

So in giving Lenin’s funeral oration, Stalin used the language of religion to confer sainthood upon a militant atheist—and upon his successor, Stalin himself: “We vow to thee, Comrade Lenin, that we will fulfill this, thy commandment….”

Related image

Funeral for Vladimir Lenin

Stalin and his fellow Communists immediately launched the “cult of Lenin,” depicting him as a fatherly, all-wise leader whose genius could only be bestowed upon his closest disciples.

Lenin’s extensive political writings were treated as divine writ, and were used to justify everything Stalin and his own successors wanted to do.

A classic example: Although he died 20 years before the American creation of the atomic bomb, Lenin was hailed by the Soviets as the “father” of “Soviet nuclear physics.”

Similarly, Republicans quickly turned Reagan into a modern-day saint of mythical proportions.

They did so for the same reason that Stalin deliberately forged a cult around the dead Lenin—to create a “holy” figure of whom other Republicans can claim to be true disciples.

Related image

Funeral for Ronald Reagan

These deliberate fictions conveniently ignore a series of ugly truths:

  • Reagan was only one of a series of Presidents who held the line against the Soviet Union.
  • His budgets were just as stained with red ink as those of all previous Presidents.
  • By the end of his term, 138 Reagan administration officials had been investigated, indicted or convicted for official misconduct and/or criminal violations. 
  • His “trickle-down” Reganomics brought prosperity to only the wealthiest 1% of Americans, proving that “a rising tide lifts some yachts.”
  • By drastically shrinking the tax-base, bloating the defense budget and destroying programs to benefit the poor and middle-class, Reagan produced a $1 trillion deficit-–which only the Clinton Administration eliminated.
  • Reagan believed that government should not help the impoverished. Those who lacked wealth to buy such necessities as housing and medical insurance were written off as unimportant.
  • John F. Kennedy had praised government service as an honor. Reagan repeatedly said that “the best and the brightest” could be found only in business.
  • This denigration of government service continues among Republicans to this day—defaming the very institutions they lust to control.
  • Although he often berated the poor for their “laziness,” Reagan adhered to a “banker’s hours” schedule: During his working hours in the Oval Office, he often had blocks of free time—two to three hours. He would call for his fan mail and answer it.
  • Reagan saw no need to protect America’s fragile environment against corporate polluters, eager to enrich themselves at its expense. He ignorantly stated: “Approximately 80% of our air pollution stems from hydrocarbons released by vegetation, so let’s not go overboard in setting and enforcing tough emission standards from man-made sources.”

Reagan famously attacked “welfare queens” and sought to deny government benefits for the poor.  But he didn’t hesitate to enrich himself at public expense.

  • Before his Presidency ended, 18 wealthy Californians contributed $156,000 apiece to buy him a 7,200 square-foot mansion overlooking Beverly Hills.
  • Reagan signed a multi-million dollar deal to write his Presidential memoirs and publish a collection of his speeches.
  • He signed an exclusive contract with a Washington lecture bureau, which paid him $50,000 per speech given in the United States and $100,000 overseas. This made him the highest-paid speaker in the country.
  • These monies came in addition to his Presidential pension of $99,500 a year for life and his $30,000 annual pension as a former governor of California.
  • At a cost to the government of $10 million annually, Reagan—a millionaire who could afford private security—continued to receive lifetime Secret Service protection from 40 fulltime agents.

The “cult of Lenin” died when the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. The “cult of Reagan” died only when it was superseded by that of Donald Trump.

The difference: Reagan hid his brutal deeds behind a smile; Trump celebrates his openly with a frown.

ANN COULTER: FALLING IN–AND OUT–OF LOVE WITH A TYRANT

In Bureaucracy, History, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on July 16, 2025 at 8:44 pm

On November 6, 2012, Ann Coulter, the Right-wing activist and propagandist, was devastated by the re-election of President Barack Obama.         

“People are suffering. The country is in disarray,” she whined during an interview.If Mitt Romney [the Republican Presidential nominee] cannot win in this economy, then the tipping point has been reached. We have more takers than makers and it’s over. There is no hope.”

Mitt Romney

But by 2016, Coulter no longer felt dismayed. She felt rejuvenated—for she had found her perfect Presidential candidate: Donald Trump.

Appearing on the Right-wing radio program, “The Eric Metaxes Show,” she said: “What is the point of talking about abortion or anything else unless you get Donald Trump in to build the wall, deport illegals, end this ‘anchor baby’ nonsense, stop importing 100,000 Muslims a year, in addition to two million Third Worlders per year. It’s madness what this country has been doing.” 

Donald Trump

And Coulter sang Trump’s praises in a 2016 book: In Trump We Trust: E Pluribus Awesome!

According to its dust jacket: “He’s putting America first in our trade deals and alliances, rather than pandering to our allies and enemies.

“He’s abandoned the GOP’s decades-long commitment to a bellicose foreign policy, at a time when the entire country is sick of unnecessary wars.” 

Buy In Trump We Trust: E Pluribus Awesome! Book Online at Low Prices in India | In Trump We Trust: E Pluribus Awesome! Reviews & Ratings - Amazon.in

But by May, 2017, four months after Trump had taken office as President, Coulter was ready to abandon him. Her chief complaint: He hadn’t built the wall along the United States-Mexican border he had promised to erect. 

I guess we have to try to push him to keep his promises. But this isn’t North Korea, and if he doesn’t keep his promises I’m out,” she told the Right-wing website, The Daily Caller

“This is why we voted for him. I think everyone who voted for him knew his personality was grotesque, it was the issues.” 

And, on March 28, 2018, she had more choice words for him: “I knew he was a shallow, lazy ignoramus, and I didn’t care.”

On April, 1, she—by her account—had a shouting match with Trump in the Oval Office. 

Ann Coulter (Gage Skidmore photo)

On the Right-wing “Howie Carr Show,” she claimed to have told him: “You’re not doing what you promised to do. Where’s the end of NAFTA? Where’s the wall? Where are the deportations? What are you doing talking about the DREAMers?”  

“He’s failing right now,” Coulter told Carr. “The presidency isn’t over yet, he can still come back and do it. But people who voted for him shouldn’t be cheering for him every time he betrays them and this is a total betrayal for him to sign that [government appropriations] bill. It’s a total betrayal for him not to build the wall. And to pretend like it isn’t—yeah he can come back.”

But Trump didn’t build that wall. And Coulter was still furious with him.

In an April 4, 2023 column, she wrote: “The left’s sole objective is to make Trump the Republicans’ 2024 presidential nominee. He’s already lost three election cycles for the GOP—why not make it four?” 

In short: She backed a monster to wreak destruction on those she hated. And then she became furious at him because he didn’t act monstrously enough.

Coulter backed Florida Governor Ron DeSantis—who polled significantly better than Trump among crucial independent voters—for President in 2024.

But DeSantis didn’t even come close to getting the Republican nomination. And Trump not only got the nomination but won the election against Vice President Kamala Harris. 

Since being reelected in 2024, Trump has launched an all-out war on illegal immigrants. According to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE): During Trump’s first 100 days, ICE arrested  over 65,000 illegal aliens.

Asked what that time would be remembered for, Coulter said: “The 100 most wonderful days in U.S. history. I can’t believe how great Trump is.”

But in April 2025, she raised concerns about the legality of deporting people who hadn’t committed a crime, possibly violating First Amendment rights.

And Trump’s intervening in the conflict between Israel and Iran definitely violated her stated desire to end “the GOP’s decades-long commitment to a bellicose foreign policy.” 

On June 12, Israel opened hostilities, with airstrikes targeting Iran’s nuclear program and leadership. But Israel lacked the 30,000-pound “bunker-busting” bombs that can penetrate the Fordo nuclear site, hidden deep underground in a mountain.

Only the United States has the bombs—and the aircraft that can deliver them. So Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu leaned on Trump to provide both.

And on June 14, he did—sending B-2 bombers to attack three Iranian nuclear sites.

This has split the MAGA base. Some support the United States’ traditional policy of supporting Israel. Others—like Coulter—want to keep the country out of “unnecessary wars.”

Trump claimed he would wait two weeks to see if Iran wants to “negotiate”—that is, agree to abandon its nuclear ambitions. For Trump, “negotiation” means: “Do as I say or I’ll destroy you.”

But more than a month has passed, and Iran has not responded to Trump’s demand. There is currently no way to tell what his next move—if any—on this issue will be.

The odds are overwhelming that Coulter will be disappointed once again.

HITLER DAYS ARE HERE AGAIN: PART FOUR (END)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, Social commentary on January 10, 2025 at 12:10 am

On September 15, 1938, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain met with German Chancellor Adolf Hitler in Berchtesgaden, Germany.   

The reason: Hitler had threatened war with Czechoslovakia—and even with Great Britain—if the Czechs did not cede to Germany the “Sudetenland.” This consisted of the northern, southwest and western regions of Czechoslovakia, inhabited mostly by ethnic Germans. 

Neville Chamberlain and Adolf Hitler

To Chamberlain’s surprise, Hitler denied he intended to use force to gain his ends.

Then, without warning, the Fuhrer switched to an aggressive mode: “I shall not put up with this any longer. I shall settle this question in one way or another. I shall take matters in my own hands!”

Suddenly, Chamberlain seemed alarmed—and possibly angry: “In the circumstances, it is best for me to return at once. Anything else now seems pointless.”

Hitler was taken aback by the unexpected show of defiance. He realized he was about to lose his chance to bully the British into accepting his latest demands.

So he offered to consider the Sudetenland according to the principle of self-determination.

Chamberlain said he must immediately return to England to consult with his colleagues “and then meet you again.” He then agreed to the cession of the Sudetenland.

Three days later, French Prime Minister Edouard Daladier did the same. No Czechoslovak representative was invited to these discussions.

Chamberlain met Hitler again in Godesberg, Germany, on September 22 to confirm the agreements. But Hitler aimed to use the crisis as a pretext for war.

He now demanded not only the annexation of the Sudetenland but the immediate military occupation of the territories. This would give the Czechoslovak army no time to adapt their defense measures to the new borders.

To achieve a solution, Italian dictator Benito Mussolini suggested a conference of the major powers in Munich.

On September 29, Hitler, Daladier and Chamberlain met and agreed to Mussolini’s proposal. They signed the Munich Agreement, which accepted the immediate occupation of the Sudetenland.

The Czechoslovak government had not been a party to the talks. Nevertheless, it promised to abide by the agreement on September 30.

It actually had no choice, having been deserted by its pledged allies: Britain, France and the Soviet Union.

Chamberlain returned to England a hero. Holding aloft a copy of the worthless agreement he had signed with Hitler, he told cheering crowds in London: “I believe it is peace for our time.”

Neville Chamberlain

Winston Churchill knew better, predicting: “Britain and France had to choose between war and dishonor. They chose dishonor. They will have war.”

Hitler—still planning more conquests—also knew better. In March, 1939, the German army occupied the rest of Czechoslovakia.

Chamberlain would soon be seen as a naive weakling—even before bombs started falling on London.

Hitler next turned his attention—and demands—to Poland. 

When his generals balked, warning that an invasion would trigger a war with France and Britain, Hitler quickly brushed aside their fears: “Our enemies are little worms. I saw them at Munich.”

Adolf Hitler with his generals

Hitler ordered the invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939—unintentionally triggering World War II.

In time, historians and statesmen would regard Munich as an object lesson in the futility—and danger—in appeasing evil and aggression.

But for the postwar Republican party, Hitler’s my-way-or-else “negotiating” methods would become standard operating procedure. Latest case in point: President-elect Donald Trump’s aggressive moves toward Greenland.

“For purposes of National Security and Freedom throughout the World, the United States of America feels that the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on December 23. 

The next day, Greenland’s Prime Minister Mute Egede told Trump to back off: “Greenland is ours. We are not for sale and will never be for sale. We must not lose our long struggle for freedom.” 

The Kingdom of Denmark holds control of the semiautonomous Greenland.

Trump had previously floated the idea of the U.S. buying Greenland in 2019, which the Danish prime minister at the time called “absurd.” 

This is not a time for the United States to endanger its relationship with Greenland—which is more than the world’s biggest island.

It’s home to America’s Pituffik Space Base which “detects and reports attack assessments of sea-launched and intercontinental ballistic missile threats in support of strategic missile warning and missile defense,” according to the base’s website.

Greenland is strategically significant to the United States because it sits between Russia and the eastern coast of the United States, and is the fastest way from Europe to New York.

It’s also located beside the Norwegian Sea, which connects the Atlantic Ocean to the Arctic Ocean and the Barents Sea, where the Russian navy’s northern fleet operates.

Some critics have speculated that Trump is floating headline-getting assaults on other nations to divert attention from his domestic agenda—which includes deporting millions of men, women and children from Hispanic countries.

And while Trump picks needless fights with America’s longtime allies, China—the first peer competitor that can challenge America economically, militarily, and technologically—is deepening its ties with Russia, Iran, North Korea, and other countries that seek to weaken U.S. power. 

HITLER DAYS ARE HERE AGAIN: PART THREE (OF FOUR)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Military, Politics, Social commentary on January 9, 2025 at 12:10 am

Contrary to popular belief, Adolf Hitler did not constantly rage at everyone. On the contrary: he could, when he desired, be charming, especially to women. He used rage as a weapon, knowing that most people feel intimidated by it.      

In his “negotiations” for control of Austria with Austrian Chancellor Kurt von Schuschnigg. Hitler opened with insults and threats at the outset of their discussion. Then there was a period of calm, to convince the Austrian chancellor the worst was over.

Finally, he once again attacked—this time with so much fury that Schuschnigg was terrified into submission.

With one stroke of a pen, Austria became a vassal-state to Nazi Germany.

Seven months later, in September, 1938, Hitler turned his rage and aggression against Czechoslovakia.

Once again, he opened “negotiations” with a lie: The Czechoslovak government was trying to exterminate 3.5 million Germans living in the “Sudetenland.”

This consisted of the northern, southwest and western regions of Czechoslovakia, inhabited mostly by ethnic Germans.

Then he followed this up with the threat of war: Germany would protect its citizens and halt such “oppression.”

For British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, the thought of another European war erupting less than 20 years after the end of World War I was simply unthinkable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cenotaph_Unveiling,_1920.jpg

The Cenotaph, in London, honoring the unknown British dead of World War 1

Something had to be done to prevent it.  And he believed himself to be just the man to do it.

He quickly sent Hitler a telegram, offering to help resolve the crisis: “I could come to you by air and am ready to leave tomorrow. Please inform me of earliest time you can receive me, and tell me the place of the meeting. I should be grateful for a very early reply.”

Once again, another head-of-state was prepared to meet Hitler on his home ground. Again, Hitler took this concession as a sign of weakness. And Chamberlain’s use of such words as “please” and “grateful” only further convinced Hitler of another impending triumph.

Chamberlain was determined to grant Hitler’s every demand—so long as this meant avoiding a second world war.

As a political party, Democrats have generally copied this same “strategy” when dealing with Republicans.  

On January 6, 2021, President Donald Trump—supported by at least 147 Republicans in the House and Senate—incited a treasonous coup to remain in office. This despite the overwhelming evidence that he had lost the 2020 election to former Vice President Joseph Biden.

By the time the Biden administration neared its end, not one Republican House or Senate member supporting such treason had been indicted for that infamy. Let alone tried, convicted and imprisoned. 

Had this occurred, the Biden administration’s agenda would have been far more advanced than it is. Republicans who were raising funds for re-election campaigns would have been forced to raise them to pay huge legal bills.

They would have had far less time to plot to overthrow democracy. Instead, their attention would have been increasingly focused on their upcoming trials for treason.

Even more important: Donald Trump should have been indicted for treason by no later than mid-2021. Even then, the evidence was overwhelming that he had instigated the coup attempt.

Um... Little Words Can Signal Big Lies... You Know | Psychology Today Singapore

Yet it wasn’t until November 18, 2022, that Jack Smith was appointed Special Counsel to oversee the criminal investigations into Trump’s role in the January 6 Capitol attack and his illegal storage of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate. 

And Smith allowed Trump-appointed Florida Judge Aileen Cannon to repeatedly postpone the stolen documents trial. 

Meanwhile, Trump won repeated delays in his trial for inciting a violent attack on the Capitol. His victory on November 5 guarantees he will not be prosecuted for any of his crimes.

United States Department of Justice - Wikipedia

To bring down Mafia “boss of all bosses” John Gotti, the FBI waged a seven-year, $75 million campaign—which included the use of electronic bugs and recruitment of informants.

To date, there is no evidence that the Bureau applied such an effort against Trump—although he, unlike Gotti, threatens the very foundations of American democracy.

To avert war, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain met with German Chancellor Adolf Hitler in Berchtesgaden, Germany, on September 15, 1938.

Neville Chamberlain and Adolf Hitler

During their talks, Chamberlain said he had come to discuss German grievances. But, he added, it was necessary in all circumstances to exclude the use of force.

Hitler appeared to be shocked that he could be accused of such intentions: “Force? Who speaks of force?“

Then, without warning, he switched to an aggressive mode. He accused the Czechs of having mobilized their army in May. They had mobilized–in response to the mobilization of the German army.

“I shall not put up with this any longer,” shouted Hitler.I shall settle this question in one way or another. I shall take matters in my own hands!”

Suddenly, Chamberlain seemed alarmed—and possibly angry: “If I understood you right, you are determined to proceed against Czechoslovakia in any case. If this is so, why did you let me come to Berchtesgaden?” 

Hitler was taken aback by the unexpected show of defiance. He realized he was about to lose his chance to bully the British into accepting his latest demands.

HITLER DAYS ARE HERE AGAIN: PART TWO (OF FOUR)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, Social commentary on January 8, 2025 at 12:10 am

By studying the “negotiating” methods used by Adolf Hitler,  Americans generally—and Democrats in particular—can learn much about the mindset and “negotiating” style of today’s Republican party. 

Consider President-Elect Donald Trump’s recent threats against not only Canada but Panama—specifically, to retake control of the Panama Canal.     

On December 25, Trump told a conservative conference in Arizona that Panama was charging US ships “ridiculous, highly unfair” fees to use its namesake canal.

The United States built the canal during the administration of President Theodore Roosevelt and opened it in 1914. It remained controlled by the United States until President Jimmy Carter signed a a 1977 agreement for its eventual handover to Panama in 1999.

Panama Canal (in white)

But this week, Trump threatened that if shipping rates were not lowered, “we will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to us, in full, quickly and without question.”

He accused China of operating the canal and lamented that the United States “puts in Billions of Dollars in ‘repair’ money, but will have absolutely nothing to say about ‘anything.’” 

On December 25, Trump posted on his website, Truth Social: “Merry Christmas to all, including to the wonderful soldiers of China, who are lovingly, but illegally, operating the Panama Canal.”

“There is not a single Chinese soldier in the canal,” the president of Panama, José Raúl Mulino, told reporters the next day, adding that there is “absolutely no Chinese interference.” 

Trump’s threats against Panama may be connected with the outstanding tax evasion case he faces in the country.

In 2019, the owners of a Panama City hotel tower that was previously managed and operated under the Trump brand accused the Trump Organization of pocketing money meant to pay taxes. According to a lawsuit, Trump’s companies simply kept the money, “intentionally evading taxes” and leaving the new owner liable for millions.

Yet the blunt truth remains: Unless Trump goes to war with Panama, his threat to take over the canal is effectively meaningless.

During the 2024 Presidential campaign, Trump denied reading Adolf Hitler’s notorious book, Mein Kampf (“My Struggle.”)

In the past, however, he has acknowledged owning a copy of it. And he has adopted the same “negotiating” style as the late Fuhrer: Do-as-I-say-or-I’ll-destroy-you.

A classic example of Hitler’s “bargaining style” came in 1938, when he invited Austrian Chancellor Kurt von Schuschnigg to his mountaintop retreat in Obersalzberg, Germany.  

Kurt von Schuschnigg

Hitler, an Austrian by birth, intended to annex his native land to Germany. Schuschnigg was aware of Hitler’s desire, but nevertheless felt secure in accepting the invitation. He had been assured that the question of Austrian sovereignty would not arise.

The meeting occurred on February 12, 1938.

Shuschnigg opened the discussion with a friendly compliment. Walking over to a large window, he admired the breathtaking view of the mountains.

HITLER: We haven’t come here to talk about the lovely view or the weather!

Austria has anyway never done anything which was of help to the German Reich….I am resolutely determined to make an end to all this business.  The German Reich is a great power.  Nobody can and nobody will interfere if it restores order on its frontiers. 

SCHUSCHNIGG: We simply have to go on living alongside one another, the little state next to the big one. We have no other choice.

And that is why I ask you to tell me what your concrete complaints are. We will do all in our power to sort things out and establish a friendly relationship, as far as it is possible to do so.

HITLER: That’s what you say, Herr Schuschnigg. And I am telling you that I intend to clear up the whole of the so-called Austrian question—one way or another. Do you think I don’t know that you are fortifying Austria’s border with the Reich? 

 Adolf Hitler

SCHUSCHNIGG: There can be no suggestion at all of that—

HITLER: Ridiculous explosive chambers are being built under bridges and roads—

This was a lie, and Hitler knew it was a lie. But no matter. It gave him an excuse to threaten to destroy Austria—as he was to destroy so many other nations during the next seven years. 

HITLER: I have only to give one command and all this comic stuff on the border will be blown to pieces overnight. You don’t seriously think you could hold me up, even for half an hour, do you?

Who knows—perhaps you will find me one morning in Vienna like a spring storm. Then you will go through something!  I’d like to spare the Austrians that. 

The S.A. [Hitler’s private army of Stormtroopers] and the [Condor] lLegion [which had bombed much of Spain into rubble during the three-year Spanish Civil War] would come in after the troops and nobody—not even I—could stop them from wreaking vengeance.

Schnuschigg made a cardinal mistake in dealing with Hitler: He showed fear.  And this was precisely what the Nazi dictator looked for in an opponent.

Contrary to popular belief, Hitler did not constantly rage at everyone. On the contrary: he could, when he desired, be charming, especially to women.  He used rage as a weapon, knowing that most people feel intimidated by it. 

HITLER DAYS ARE HERE AGAIN: PART ONE (OF FOUR)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, Social commentary on January 7, 2025 at 12:10 am

Once again, Republicans are ruthlessly playing “chicken” with the nation’s financial and military security.      

Even before taking the oath of office as President on January 20, 2025, Donald Trump has rushed to make an enemy of America’s longtime ally—Canada.

At a November 30 dinner at Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s estate in Palm Beach, Florida, he told Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau that Canada could become the 51st state of the United States.

Canada’s Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc, who attended the dinner, insisted that Trump was joking.

But on December 2, Trump threatened to impose a 25% tax on all products entering the United States from Canada and Mexico unless they stopped the flow of drugs and illegal aliens.

Official White House presidential portrait. Head shot of Trump smiling in front of the U.S. flag, wearing a dark blue suit jacket with American flag lapel pin, white shirt, and light blue necktie.

Donald Trump

And on December 3, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform an AI-generated image of himself standing on a mountain with a Canadian flag beside him. Its caption: “Oh Canada!”  

Trudeau had requested the Mar-a-Lago meeting to convince Trump that the northern border is completely different from the southern one with Mexico. 

“Less than one percent of migrants coming into the United States irregularly come from Canada and 0.2 percent of the fentanyl coming into the United States comes from Canada,” Trudeau said in Parliament. 

During the last fiscal year, American customs agents seized 43 pounds of fentanyl at the Canadian border, compared with 21,100 pounds at the Mexican border. 

Most of the fentanyl reaching the U.S. is made by Mexican drug cartels using precursor chemicals smuggled from Asia. 

Utterly unmentioned in Trump’s demand: It’s America’s insatiable demand for illicit drugs that is the root cause of the drug trade. 

Justin Trudeau

CC BY 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0&gt;, via Wikimedia Commons

On immigration, the U.S. Border Patrol reported 1.53 million encounters with would-be illegal aliens  at the Mexican border between October 2023 and September 2024. At the Canadian border, there were 23,721 such encounters.

Also unmentioned—if not deliberately ignored by Trump: Canada plays a substantial role as a U.S. trading partner. About 60% of U.S. crude oil imports are from Canada, and 85% of U.S. electricity imports as well.

Canada is also the largest foreign supplier of steel, aluminum and uranium to the U.S. and has 34 critical minerals and metals that the Pentagon eagerly desires. About 77% of Canada’s exports go to the U.S. 

Trudeau pleaded with Trump not to impose the tariff because because it would “kill” Canada’s economy. 

Trump responded: “So your country can’t survive unless it’s ripping off the US to the tune of $100 billion?”

His comments referred to the US trade deficit with Canada.

The U.S. had a $75 billion trade deficit with Canada last year but a third of what Canada sells into the U.S. is energy exports and prices have been high.

Trudeau left the meeting without reassurance that Trump would not impose a 25% tariff on products  from Canada.

Republicans, in short, are one again utilizing the same “negotiating” strategy as Nazi Germany’s Fuhrer, Adolf Hitler.

And Democrats—out of cowardice or an ignorance of history—are once again refusing to publicly make this comparison.

By studying Adolf Hitler’s mindset and “negotiating” methods, we can learn much about the mindset and “negotiating” style of today’s Republican party.

Robert Payne, author of the bestselling biography, The Life and Death of Adolf Hitler (1973), described Hitler’s “negotiating” style thus: 

“Although Hitler prized his own talents as a negotiator, a man always capable of striking a good bargain, he was totally lacking in finesse. 

“He was incapable of bargaining. He was like a man who goes up to a fruit peddler and threatens to blow his brains out if he does not sell his applies at the lowest possible price.” 

A classic example of Hitler’s “bargaining style” came in 1938, when he invited Austrian Chancellor Kurt von Schuschnigg to his mountaintop retreat in Obersalzberg, Germany. 

Hitler, an Austrian by birth, intended to annex his native land to Germany. Schuschnigg was aware of Hitler’s desire, but nevertheless felt secure in accepting the invitation. He had been assured that the question of Austrian sovereignty would not arise.

 Kurt von Schuschnigg

The meeting occurred on February 12, 1938.

Shuschnigg opened the discussion with a friendly compliment. Walking over to a large window, he admired the breathtaking view of the mountains.

HITLER: We haven’t come here to talk about the lovely view or the weather!

Austria has anyway never done anything which was of help to the German Reich….I am resolutely determined to make an end to all this business. The German Reich is a great power.  Nobody can and nobody will interfere if it restores order on its frontiers. 

SCHUSCHNIGG: I am aware of your attitude toward the Austrian question and toward Austrian history….As we Austrians see it, the whole of our history is a very essential and valuable part of German history….And Austria’s contribution is a considerable one.

HITLER: It is absolutely zero—that I can assure you! Every national impulse has been trampled underfoot by Austria….

I could call myself an Austrian with just the same right—indeed with even more right—than you, Herr Schuschnigg. Why don’t you once try a plebiscite in Austria in which you and I run against each other? Then you would see!   

MY PHILOSOPHY AS A BLOGGER

In History, Politics, Social commentary on October 23, 2024 at 12:59 am

On November 13, 2012, Dave, a conservative friend of mine who reads my blog, sent this email to a friend:  

Warren,

This is the propaganda blog editor friend of mine in San Francisco that I talked about during my presentation last Thursday evening at the Opera House.

As you can see, he is a typical unbiased uournalist…. As I said, I love the guy dearly and truly have the utmost respect for his ability and intellect (although it’s sometimes pointed). Nonetheless, I thought you and others would get a kick out of this blog.I would suggest that you log onto his site and read some of his other postings.  You will then see why I am such an admirer….   

* * * * *

Thus, here is my philosophy as a blogger for those of you who read my blog.

Many years ago I worked as an investigative reporter, covering local police and courts for a small Utah newspaper

As a reporter, I adhered strictly to a policy of objectivity: Reporting only what I knew to be true.  And in crime-related stories, reporting only what I knew I could legally prove to be true.

For example: You might feel absolutely certain that So-and-So committed a crime.  But to avoid libel suits, you had better have the proof in legal documents. And if you can find sources who are willing to back up those legal documents, so much the better.

Another thing: As a straight journalist, you have no right to inject your opinion into anything you write.

So if you write a story about a mayor or councilman you know is corrupt, you don’t have the right to add: “This guy needs to be tossed out of office and indicted.”

If a prosecutor says that, quote him. But your opinion doesn’t matter.

As a blogger I editorialize by pointing out what these facts mean (at least to me) and offering, when possible, a proposed solution to problems.

Take my column about Right-wing columnist Ann Coulter.

On November 13, 2012, I posted a column entitled, “Tears for the Miss America Nazi.”

Coulter had been outraged that Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney had not deprived Barack Obama of a second term as President.

First, I laid out her recent, public weeping over the re-election of President Obama. Then I quoted comedian Bill Maher and political commentator Chris Matthews on their reactions to Coulter’s comment that “There is no hope.”

Ann Coulter

Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0&gt;, via Wikimedia Commons

So far, I had adhered to journalistic principles of fairness and objectivity—the who, what, when, where, how and why of journalism.

Only in the last six paragraphs of my column did I venture an opinion.

First, I laid out the historical precedent for what I intended to recommend. When her Fuhrer, Adolf Hitler, committed suicide, Magda Goebbels murdered her six children. Then she and her husband, Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels, killed themselves. 

Magda Goebbels - Wikipedia

Magda and Joseph Goebbels and their children 

Bundesarchiv, Bild 146-1978-086-03 / CC-BY-SA 3.0, CC BY-SA 3.0 DE <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/de/deed.en&gt;, via Wikimedia Commons

Then I offered the depressed Coulter an option she might not have considered: She could follow the example of Magda (minus the husband and children that Magda had and Coulter lacked).

Not that I expected her to do so.

Frankly, I didn’t consider Ann Coulter a legitimate journalist. She and Rush Limbaugh were the ultimate propaganda icons for the Republican party. They made a career out of attacking the integrity and patriotism of anyone who dared to disagree with them.

For example: Take Coulter’s book Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism.

One of her heroes is Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, who unleashed a wave of hysteria across America with his slanderous accusations of massive Communist infiltration of the Federal Government.

Joseph McCarthy

Coulter maintains that McCarthy was a true patriot, and that he—not his victims—was the true victim of history.

This is on a par with rewriting history as the son of Laventi Beria, Joseph Stalin’s infamous secret police chief, has attempted. He insists that his father was a good man who was forced by Stalin to do bad things.

Jesus was right: “You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” I hugely admire those who seek out the truth and speak it forcefully, without fear or favor.

And I despise those who ride to fame, power or wealth on a carpet of lies and evasions. Although I have written heavily about the infamies of the Right, I realize there is plenty of stupidity, arrogance and criminality on the Left.

I don’t believe that any person, agency, political party or corporation has a monopoly on virtue, intelligence or judgment. On the contrary: Members of agencies, political parties and corporations should be held to the highest level of scrutiny. This is especially true when those institutions hold vast power over the lives of ordinary citizens.

Throughout the last half-century Republicans have dominated American politics—and the lives of Americans. Thus I have written far more about their all-consuming lust for absolute power than I have on the usually secondary role played by Democrats.

PREVENTING THE NEXT SHUTDOWN: PART FIVE (END)

In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Medical, Politics, Social commentary on October 6, 2023 at 12:11 am

Republicans are already gearing up for their next extortionate threat: Do what we want or we’ll shut down the Federal Government.  

Among the consequences:

“If you don’t send out Social Security checks, I would hate to think about the credit meeting at S&P and Moody’s the next morning,” said Warren Buffett, CEO of Berkshire Hathaway

“If you’re not paying millions and millions and millions of people that range in age from 65 on up, money you promised them, you’re not a AAA” credit rating.

But this does not have to happen.

REMEDY 2: THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT SHOULD INDICT FOR EXTORTION THOSE HOLDING THE GOVERNMENT HOSTAGE.

President Joseph Biden could order the Justice Department to invoke the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act.

Passed by Congress in 1970, as Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1961-1968, its goal was to destroy the Mafia.  

The United States Department of Justice

RICO opens with a series of definitions of “racketeering activity” which can be prosecuted by Justice Department attorneys.  Among those crimes: Extortion

Extortion is defined as “a criminal offense which occurs when a person unlawfully obtains either money, property or services from a person(s), entity, or institution, through coercion.” 

And if President Biden believed that RICO was not sufficient to deal with Republicans’ extortion attempts, he could rely on the USA Patriot Act of 2001, passed in the wake of 9/11.

In Section 802, the Act defines domestic terrorism. Among the behavior defined as criminal:

“Activities that…appear to be intended…to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion [and]…occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.”

The remedies for punishing such criminal behavior were now legally in place. President Biden needs only to direct the Justice Department to apply them.

PROBLEM: This would require a Democratic President and Justice Department to act courageously—which would be a rarity for either.

Example: 147 Republican Congressional members voted to invalidate the Electoral College vote count of the 2020 Presidential election. To this date, not one has been indicted for treason.

REMEDY 3: PRESIDENT BIDEN SHOULD ATTACK THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AS A THREAT TO NATIONAL SECURITY.

Numerous Republicans have taken “campaign contributions”—i.e., bribes—from Russian oligarchs linked to Russian dictator Vladimir Putin.

One Russian oligarch—Len Blavatnik—has given millions of dollars to top Republican leaders such as Senators Mitch McConnell (Kentucky), Marco Rubio (Florida) and Lindsey Graham (South Carolina).

Putin’s monies have been well-spent: About 90 House Republicans—out of a total of 213—attended Volodymyr Zelensky’s address to Congress on December 21, according to CQ Roll Call. Some who did spent much of the speech on their phones. 

Many Republicans—such as former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who in 2021 received about $255,000 from Blavatnik—have openly threatened to end all funding for Ukraine’s heroic struggle against Russian aggression.

Kevin McCarthy, official photo, 116th Congress.jpg

Kevin McCarthy

Even some “Reagan Republicans”—such as James Kirchick, a conservative foreign correspondent and author—have openly denounced this treason.

Thus, the White House could ignite an internal conflict within the Right by pitting Republicans against each other.

PROBLEM: Democrats rarely find the courage to attack their enemies as traitors, even when the treason is manifest—as it was when Donald Trump was elected President with the support of Vladimir Putin.

REMEDY 4: CITIZENS WHOSE LIVES HAVE BEEN DRASTICALLY HARMED BY REPUBLICAN POLICIES COULD CHOOSE “THE HEYDRICH SOLUTION.”

Reinhard Heydrich was second-in-command of the dreaded Schutzstaffel, or Protective Squads, better known as the SS. Among his his multitude of crimes Designing “The Final Solution to the Jewish Question,” resulting in the slaughter of six million men, women and children.

In 1941 he was appointed “Reich Protector” of Czechoslovakia, which Nazi Germany had absorbed in 1938. The Czechs were growing restive under brutal Nazi rule, and Heydrich’s mission was to stamp out that unrest.

Reinhard Heydrich

The Czech government-in-exile, headquartered in London, decided to assassinate Heydrich.

Two British-trained Czech commandos—Jan Kubis and Joseph Gabcik—parachuted into Prague—where they got unexpected help from Heydrich himself.

Supremely arrogant, like today’s Republican leaders, he traveled the same route every day from home to his downtown office, refusing to be escorted by armed guards. He claimed that no one would dare attack him.

He was wrong.

On May 27, 1942, Kubis and Gabcik waited at a hairpin turn in the road always taken by Heydrich. When Heydrich’s Mercedes slowed down, Gabcik raised his machinegun–which jammed. Rising in his seat, Heydrich aimed his revolver at Gabcik—as Kubis lobbed a hand grenade at the car.

The explosion drove steel and leather fragments of the car’s upholstery into Heydrich’s diaphragm, spleen and lung.

Adolf Hitler dispatched doctors from Berlin to save the Reich Protector. But infection set in, and on June 4, 1942, Heydrich died at age 38.   

ADVISORY: While this remedy is not suggested, it remains an extremely real possibility. Those who have lost access to food, housing and/or medical care for themselves or loved ones under “screw-the-poor” Republican policies could easily decide to follow the advice of Winston Churchill.

When England seemed threatened with a German invasion in 1940, his daughter-in-law, Pamela, asked: “But, Papa, what can I do?”

Replied Churchill: “You can always get a carving knife from the kitchen and take one of the bastards with you.”

PREVENTING THE NEXT REPUBLICAN SHUTDOWN: PART FOUR (OF FIVE)

In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Medical, Politics, Social commentary on October 5, 2023 at 12:10 am

One reason why a handful of House Republicans threatened to shut down the Federal Government by October 1: Calling themselves “budget deficit hawks,” they demanded huge cuts in non-military spending.    

Among the programs these cuts would have devastated: Food safety, education, law enforcement, housing, public health, Head Start and child care, Meals on Wheels.

Their attitude toward budget deficits had been vastly different while Donald Trump was President.

On August 2, 2019, Trump signed into law a two-year budget deal that raised spending by $320 billion over existing spending caps set in a 2011 law—and boosted military and domestic spending.

The bill also lifted the debt ceiling, which is the legal limit on the amount of debt the federal government can have.

The bill threatened to push the budget deficit to more than $1 trillion in 2019 for only the second time since the Great Recession of 2007-2008 and add $1.7 trillion to the federal debt over a decade.

Official White House presidential portrait. Head shot of Trump smiling in front of the U.S. flag, wearing a dark blue suit jacket with American flag lapel pin, white shirt, and light blue necktie.

Donald Trump

By January, 2021, the national debt had risen by almost $7.8 trillion during Trump’s four years in office. It amounted to about $23,500 in new federal debt for every person in the country. 

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) praised the Republicans’ massive contribution to the national debt.

Now, with a Democratic President  in office, Republicans—invoking the my-way-or-else “negotiating” strategy of Adolf Hitler—were threatening to plunge the United States into financial ruin unless their extortion demands were met.

The casualties of a government shutdown would include: 

  • Seven million vulnerable mothers and children would stop receiving monies for food under the Women and Children (WIC) program.
  • All active-duty military personnel and law enforcement officers would be forced to work without pay until appropriated funds became available. 
  • If additional catastrophes occurred, FEMA’s Disaster Relief Fund could be depleted, thus complicating new emergency response efforts. 
  • Critical research on diseases like cancer and Alzheimer’s would stall because the National Institutes of Health would be forced to delay new clinical trials.
  • Air traffic controllers and Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) officers would be forced to work without pay. The added stress they would face from being unable to meet rent and food payments could dangerously affect their job performance.
  • Most EPA-led inspections at hazardous waste sites as well as drinking water and chemical facilities would stop. 
  • The Food and Drug Administration would be forced to delay food safety inspections for a wide variety of products across the country. 

Here’s what Republicans demanded in return for not shutting down the government:

  • Severe cuts would be made to Social Security by increasing the age of future retirees.
  • Disabled Americans on Medicare would be forced to wait longer to receive benefits.
  • Medicare would be turned into a voucher system—which would remove the guarantee for seniors to have access to affordable medical care.
  • Taxes would be cut for the wealthy and corporations.
  • More requirements would be imposed on the poor trying to obtain social services.
  • “Regulatory reforms that increase economic growth” (i.e. allowing corporations to ignore laws protecting employees, customers and/or the environment) would become law.
  • Further funding to defend Ukraine against continuing aggression by Russia would end.

Image result for Extortion

By a last-minute compromise between House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy and Democrats, this latest Republican extortion attempt was averted.

But current funding will expire on November 17. And then the country will face yet another date with financial disaster.

Fortunately, there are several ways to permanently address these exercises in political criminality.

REMEDY 1: LEGALLY REQUIRE CONGRESS TO STAY IN SESSION UNTIL A BUDGET COMPROMISE IS REACHED.

The federal government’s fiscal year ends every September 30. Before this deadline, Congress must write and pass the budget for the next fiscal year. If a budget agreement is not reached in time, funding for federal agencies lapse and the government shuts down. 

Yet with the shutdown deadline looming, on July 29, the House and Senate broke for their annual August recess. The Senate remained in recess until September 5; the House remained in recess until September 12.  

Congress had to enact all 12 appropriations bills or pass a Continuing Resolution (CR) to keep the federal government funded and avoid a shutdown on October 1.

NEEDED: A law requiring Congress to remain in session until a budget compromise is reached. Any Congressional member who leaves before this occurs would be immediately discharged and never allowed to return. 

PROBLEM: This would require Congressional members to impose restrictions on themselves—which they are unwilling to do.

REMEDY 2: THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT SHOULD INDICT FOR EXTORTION THOSE HOLDING THE GOVERNMENT HOSTAGE.

President Joseph Biden could order the Justice Department to invoke the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act.

Passed by Congress in 1970, as Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1961-1968, its goal was to destroy the Mafia.  But in United States v. Turkette, 452 U.S. 576 (1981), the Supreme Court held that RICO applied as well to legitimate enterprises being operated in a criminal manner. 

After Turkette,  RICO could also be used against corporations, political protest groups, labor unions and loosely knit-groups of people.

RICO opens with a series of definitions of “racketeering activity” which can be prosecuted by Justice Department attorneys.

These activities include a Republican favorite: Extortion.

PREVENTING THE NEXT REPUBLICAN SHUTDOWN: PART THREE (OF FIVE)

In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Medical, Politics, Social commentary on October 4, 2023 at 12:15 am

Republicans have repeatedly utilized the same my-way-or-else “negotiating” strategy as Nazi Germany’s Fuhrer, Adolf Hitler.     

And Democrats—out of cowardice or an ignorance of history—have repeatedly refused to publicly make this comparison.

By studying Adolf Hitler’s mindset and “negotiating” methods, we can learn much about the mindset and “negotiating” style of today’s Republican party.

Robert Payne, author of the bestselling biography, The Life and Death of Adolf Hitler (1973), described Hitler’s “negotiating” style thus: 

“Although Hitler prized his own talents as a negotiator, a man always capable of striking a good bargain, he was totally lacking in finesse. 

“He was incapable of bargaining. He was like a man who goes up to a fruit peddler and threatens to blow his brains out if he does not sell his applies at the lowest possible price.” 

Republicans have repeatedly threatened to shut down the government unless their constantly escalating demands are met. 

A shutdown occurs when Congress fails to approve funding for federal agencies.

In November, 1995, Newt Gingrich, then Speaker of the House of Representatives, carried out his threat to shut down the government. Gingrich unwisely admitted that he did so because President Bill Clinton had put him in the back of Air Force One during a recent trip to Israel.

The shutdown proved a disaster for Republicans. Clinton was handily re-elected in 1996 and Gingrich suddenly resigned from Congress in 1998. 

Still, the Republicans continued their policy of my-way-or-else.

In April, 2011, the United States government almost shut down over Republican demands about subsidized pap smears.

During a late-night White House meeting with President Barack Obama and key Congressional leaders, Republican House Speaker John Boehner made this threat: His conference would not approve funding for the government if any money were allowed to flow to Planned Parenthood through Title X legislation.

Facing an April 8 deadline, negotiators worked day and night to strike a compromise—and finally reached one.

Three months later—on July 9—Republican extortionists again threatened the Nation with financial ruin and international disgrace unless their demands were met. 

18,813 Handprint Stock Photos and Images - 123RF

Symbol of the Mafia “Black Hand”

This time, Republicans refused to raise the debt ceiling unless Democrats agreed to massively cut social programs for the elderly, poor and disabled.

And while Republicans demanded that the disadvantaged tighten their belts, they rejected any raising of taxes on their foremost constituency—the wealthiest 1%.

To raise taxes on the wealthy, they insisted, would be a “jobs-killer.” It would “discourage” corporate CEOs from creating tens of thousands of jobs they supposedly wanted to create. 

President Obama had offered to make historic cuts in the federal government and the social safety net—on which millions of Americans depend for their most basic needs.

But House Speaker John Boehner rejected that offer. He could not agree to the tax increases that Democrats wanted to impose on the wealthiest 1% as part of the bargain.

As the calendar moved ever closer to the fateful date of August 2, Republican leaders continued to insist: Any deal that includes taxes “can’t pass the House.”

One senior Republican said talks would go right up to—and maybe beyond—the brink of default.

“I think we’ll be here in August,” said Republican Representative Pete Sessions, of Texas. “We are not going to leave town until a proper deal gets done.” 

President Obama had previously insisted on extending the debt ceiling through 2012. But in mid-July, he simply asked congressional leaders to review three options with their members:

  1. The “Grand Bargain” choice—favored by Obama—would cut deficits by about $4 trillion, including spending cuts and new tax revenues.
  2. A medium-range plan would aim to reduce the deficit by about $2 trillion.
  3. The smallest option would cut between $1 trillion and $1.5 trillion, without increased tax revenue or any Medicare and Medicaid cuts.

And the Republican response?

Said Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee: “Quite frankly, [Republican] members of Congress are getting tired of what the president won’t do and what the president wants.”

Noted political analyst Chris Matthews summed up the sheer criminality of what happened within the House of Representatives.

Chris Matthews

Speaking on MSNBC’s “Hardball,” on July 28—five days before Congress reached its August 2 deadline to raise the debt-ceiling—Matthews noted: 

“The first people to bow to the demands of those threatening to blow up the economy were the Republicans in the House, the leaders. The leaders did what the followers told them to do: meet the demands, hold up the country to get their way.

“Those followers didn’t win the Senate, or the Presidency, just the House. But by using the House they were able to hold up the entire United States government. They threatened to blow things up economically and it worked.

“They said they were willing to do that—just to get their way—not by persuasion, not by politics, not by democratic government, but by threatening the destruction of the country’s finances.

“Right. So what’s next? The power grid? Will they next time threaten to close down the country’s electricity and communications systems?”

With the United States teetering on the brink of national bankruptcy, President Obama caved in to Republican demands.