Posts Tagged ‘DONALD TRUMP’
2016 REPUBLICAN CONVENTION, ABC NEWS, AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, CBS NEWS, CHRIS MATTHEWS, CNN, CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS, DEBT CEILING, DONALD TRUMP, EXTORTION, FACEBOOK, HARDBALL, JOHN F. KENNEDY, JUDGE MERRICK GARLAND, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEWT GINGRICH, NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI, OBAMACARE, Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, REPUBLICANS, RICHARD WOLFFE, ROBERT PAYNE, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE LIFE AND DEATH OF ADOLF HITLER, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE PRINCE, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, U.S. SENATE, U.S. SENATOR MITCH MCCONNELL, U.S. SUPREME COURT, USA PATRIOT ACT, WARREN BUFFETT
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on March 25, 2016 at 12:04 am
In September, 2013, President Barack Obama and Senate Democrats refused to knuckle under to yet another Republican extortion threat: Defund the Affordable Care Act (ACA) or we’ll shut down the government.
Republicans claimed it was Obama and Senate Democrats who refused to see reason and negotiate.
But then a Republican accidentally gave away the real reason for the shutdown.
“We’re not going to be disrespected,” Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.) told the Washington Examiner. “We have to get something out of this. And I don’t know what that even is.”
Marlin Stutzman
In short, Republicans–as admitted by Martlin Stutzman–were out to get “respect.” A member of the Crips or Bloods couldn’t have said it better.
The shutdown began on October 1, 2013–and ended 16 days later with even Republicans admitting it had been a failure.
President Obama, a former attorney, denounced House Republicans as guilty of “extortion” and “blackmail.” Had the President acted to prosecute such criminal conduct, the results would have been:
- Facing lengthy prison terms, those indicted Republicans would been forced to lawyer-up. That in itself would have been no small thing, since good criminal lawyers cost big bucks.
- Obsessed with their own personal survival, they would have found little time for engaging in the same thuggish behavior that got them indicted. In fact, doing so would have only made their conviction more likely.
- Those Republicans who hadn’t been indicted would have realized: “I could be next.” This would have produced a chilling effect on their willingness to engage in further acts of subversion and/or extortion.
- The effect on Right-wing Republicans would have been the same as that of President Ronald Reagan’s firing of striking air traffic controllers: “You cross me and threaten the security of this Nation at your own peril.”
True, some prosecuted Republicans might have beaten the rap. But first they would have been forced to spend huge amounts of time and money on their defense.
And with 75% of Americans voicing disgust with Congress, most of those prosecuted might well have been convicted.
It would have been a long time before Republicans again dared to engage in such behavior.
The ancient Greeks believed: “A man’s character is his fate.” It is Obama’s character–and America’s fate–that he is more inclined to conciliation than confrontation.
Richard Wolffe chronicled Obama’s winning of the White House in his book Renegade: The Making of a President. He noted that Obama was always more comfortable when responding to Republican attacks on his character than he was in making attacks of his own.
Obama came into office determined to find common ground with Republicans. But they quickly made it clear to him that they only wanted his political destruction.
At that point, he should have put aside his hopes for a “Kumbaya moment” and applied what Niccolo Machiavelli famously said in The Prince on the matter of love versus fear:
Niccolo Machiavelli
From this arises the question whether it is better to be loved than feared, or feared more than loved. The reply is, that one ought to be both feared and loved, but as it is difficult for the two to go together, it is much safer to be feared than loved.
For it may be said of men in general that they are ungrateful, voluble, dissemblers, anxious to avoid danger and covetous of gain.
As long as you benefit them, they are entirely yours: they offer you their blood, their goods, their life and their children, when the necessity is remote. But when it approaches, they revolt….
And men have less scruple in offending one who makes himself loved than one who makes himself feared; for love is held by a chain of obligations which, men being selfish, is broken whenever it serves their purpose; but fear is maintained by a dread of punishment which never fails.
By refusing to vigorously prosecute acts of Republican extortion, President Obama has unleashed twin disasters upon himself and the United States:
First, Republicans have been encouraged to intensify their acts of aggression against him.
Their most recent act: Refusing to meet with federal appeals court judge Merrick Garland. Obama’s designated nominee to the Supreme Court after the February 13 death of Justice Antonin Scalia.
Kentucky United States Senator Mitch McConnell has flatly stated: There will be no Supreme Court hearings–not during regular business or a post-election lame-duck session.
Had Obama proceeded with indictments against Republican extortion in 2011 or 2013, McConnell–who supported the extortion attempts of those years–would now be desperately meeting with his lawyers.
Second, Republicans have unleashed their tactics of extortion against one another.
Donald Trump, their front-running Presidential candidate, has openly threatened to aim violence at Republican delegates who do not accept him as their nominee.
As Philip Klein, the managing editor of the Washington Examiner, recently wrote:
“Political commentators now routinely talk about the riots that would break out in Cleveland if Trump were denied the nomination, about how his supporters have guns and all hell could break loose, that they would burn everything to the ground. It works to Trump’s advantage to not try too hard to dispel these notions.”
Thus, those who submit to the aggression of criminals only encourage contempt–and increased aggression–from those same criminals.
2016 REPUBLICAN CONVENTION, ABC NEWS, AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, CBS NEWS, CHRIS MATTHEWS, CNN, CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS, DEBT CEILING, DONALD TRUMP, EXTORTION, FACEBOOK, HARDBALL, JOHN F. KENNEDY, JUDGE MERRICK GARLAND, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEWT GINGRICH, NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI, OBAMACARE, Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, REPUBLICANS, RICHARD WOLFFE, ROBERT PAYNE, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE LIFE AND DEATH OF ADOLF HITLER, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE PRINCE, THE WALL STREET JOURNJAL, TWITTER, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, U.S. SENATE, U.S. SENATOR MITCH MCCONNELL, U.S. SUPREME COURT, USA PATRIOT ACT, WARREN BUFFETT
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on March 24, 2016 at 12:30 am
On July 9, 2011, Republican extortionists threatened the Nation with financial ruin and international disgrace unless their demands were met.
President Barack Obama could have countered that danger with the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. Among the crimes it authorizes for prosecution: 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 Obama had believed that RICO was not sufficient to deal with extortionate behavior, he could have relied on the USA Patriot Act of 2001, passed in the wake of 9/11.
President George W. Bush signs the USA Patriot Act into law – October 26, 2001
In Section 802, the Act defines domestic terrorism. Among the behavior that is 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 legally in place. President Obama needed only to direct the Justice Department to apply them.
Prosecuting members of Congress would not have violated the separation-of-powers principle. Congressmen have in the past been investigated, indicted and convicted for various criminal offenses.
Such prosecutions–and especially convictions–would have served notice on current and future members of Congress that the lives and fortunes of American citizens may not be held hostage as part of a negotiated settlement.
On August 1, Chris Matthews, host of MSNBC’s “Hardball,” wrapped up his program with a search for “options” to avoid another round of Republican extortion tactics.
Chris Matthews
“I want to know what steps the president ‘could’ have taken to avoid this hostage-taking.
“…Is there another way than either buckling to the Republicans or letting the government and the country crash?
“How does he use the power of the presidency, the logic, emotion and basic patriotism of the people, to thwart those willing to threaten, disrupt, even possibly destroy to get their way?”
The answer to his questions–then and now–is: Replace the law of fear with the rule of law.
But there was another way Obama could have stood up to Republican extortionists: By urging his fellow Americans to rally to him in a moment of supreme national danger.
President John F. Kennedy did just that–successfully–during the most dangerous crisis of his administration.
Addressing the Nation on October 22, 1962, Kennedy shocked his fellow citizens by revealing that the Soviet Union had installed offensive nuclear missiles in Cuba.
John F. Kennedy
After outlining a series of steps he had taken to end the crisis, Kennedy sought to reassure and inspire his audience. His words are worth remembering today:
“The path we have chosen for the present is full of hazards, as all paths are, but it is the one most consistent with our character and courage as a nation and our commitments around the world.
“The cost of freedom is always high, but Americans have always paid it. And one path we shall never choose, and that is the path of surrender or submission.”
President Obama could have sent that same message to the extortionists of the Republican Party.
Yet this was another option he failed to exploit. And he and the Nation have continued to pay the price for it.
In the fall of 2013, Republicans once again threatened to shut down the Federal Government unless the President agreed to defund the Affordable Care Act (ACA), better known as “Obamacare.
They were enraged that millions of uninsured Americans might receive medical care on a par with that given members of the House and Senate.
So on September 20, the House voted on a short-term government funding bill that included a provision to defund Obamacare.
That provision was a no-go for Senate Democrats and President Obama. If the House and Senate couldn’t reach a compromise, many functions of the federal government would be shut down indefinitely on October 1.
The official reason given by Republicans: They wanted to save the country from bankruptcy–although the Congressional Budget Office stated that the ACA would lower future deficits and Medicare spending.
After passing the House and Senate, the ACA had been signed into law by President Obama on March 23, 2010.
On June 28, 2012, the United States Supreme Court–whose Chief Justice, John Roberts, is a Republican–had upheld the constitutionality of the ACA.
Yet House Republicans continued searching for a way to stop the law from taking effect. By September, 2013, they had voted 42 times to repeal “Obamacare.”
But their efforts had failed; the Democratic-led Senate made it clear it would never go along with such legislation.
Finally, unable to legally overturn the Act or to legislatively repeal it, House Republicans fell back on something much simpler: Threats and fear.
Threats–of voting to shut down salaries paid to most Federal employees. Most, because they themselves would continue to draw hefty salaries while denying them to FBI agents, air traffic controllers and members of the military, among others.
And fear–that would be generated throughout the Federal government, the United States and America’s international allies.
On October 1, 2013, House Republicans made good on their threat. They “shut down the government.”
2016 REPUBLICAN CONVENTION, ABC NEWS, AFFORDABLE CARE ACT (ACA), BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, CBS NEWS, CHRIS MATTHEWS, CNN, CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS, DEBT CEILING, DONALD TRUMP, EXTORTION, FACEBOOK, HARDBALL, JOHN F. KENNEDY, JUDGE MERRICK GARLAND, MAFIA, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEWT GINGRICH, NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI, OBAMACARE, Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, REPUBLICANS, RICHARD WOLFFE, ROBERT PAYNE, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE LIFE AND DEATH OF ADOLF HITLER, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE PRINCE, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, U.S. SENATE, U.S. SENATOR MITCH MCCONNELL, U.S. SUPREME COURT, USA PATRIOT ACT, WARREN BUFFETT
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on March 23, 2016 at 12:01 am
On July 9, 2011, Republican extortionists threatened the Nation with financial ruin and international disgrace unless their demands were met. They refused to raise the debt ceiling unless Democrats agreed to massively cut social programs for the elderly, poor and disabled.
If Congress failed to raise the borrowing limit of the federal government by August 2, the date when the U.S. reached the limit of its borrowing abilities, it would begin defaulting on its loans.
As Warren Buffett, CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, explained the looming economic catastrophe: “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.
“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,” said Buffett.
Warren Buffett
A triple-A credit rating is the highest possible rating that can be received.
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 “want” to create.
Republicans knew this argument was a lie. And so did the editors of Time. The difference between them: The editors of Time were willing to reveal the truth.
In its June 20, 2011 cover-story on “What U.S. Economic Recovery? Five Destructive Myths,” Rana Foroohar, the magazine’s assistant managing editor in charge of economics and business, delivered this warning: Profit-seeking corporations can’t be relied on to ”make it all better.”
Wrote Foroohar:
“There is a fundamental disconnect between the fortunes of American companies, which are doing quite well, and American workers, most of whom are earning a lower hourly wage now than they did during the recession.
“The thing is, companies make plenty of money; they just don’t spend it on workers here.
“There may be $2 trillion sitting on the balance sheets of American corporations globally, but firms show no signs of wanting to spend it in order to hire workers at home.”
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 Rep. 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:
- The “Grand Bargain” choice—favored by Obama–would cut deficits by about $4 trillion, including spending cuts and new tax revenues.
- A medium-range plan would aim to reduce the deficit by about $2 trillion.
- 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 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.
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.
Chris Matthews
“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 faced three choices:
- Counter Republican extortion attempts via RICO–the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act.
- Make a “Cuban Missile Crisis”-style address to the American people, seeking to rally them against a criminal threat to the financial security of the Nation.
- Cave in to Republican demands.
Unfortunately for Obama and the Nation, he chose Number Three.
But he could have countered that danger via the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act.
In 1970, Congress passed RICO, Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1961-1968. Its goal: Destroy the Mafia.
U.S. 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.”
2016 REPUBLICAN CONVENTION, ABC NEWS, AFFORDABLE CARE ACT (ACA), BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, CBS NEWS, CHRIS MATTHEWS, CNN, CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS, DEBT CEILING, DONALD TRUMP, EXTORTION, FACEBOOK, HARDBALL, JOHN F. KENNEDY, JUDGE MERRICK GARLAND, MAFIA, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEWT GINGRICH, NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI, OBAMACARE, Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, REPUBLICANS, RICHARD WOLFFE, ROBERT PAYNE, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE LIFE AND DEATH OF ADOLF HITLER, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE PRINCE, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, U.S. SENATE, U.S. SENATOR MITCH MCCONNELL, U.S. SUPREME COURT, USA PATRIOT ACT, WARREN BUFFETT
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on March 22, 2016 at 12:01 am
On March 16, Donald Trump, the front-runner for the Republican Presidential nomination, issued a warning to his fellow Right-wingers: If he didn’t win the GOP nomination at the convention in July, his supporters would literally riot.
“I think we’ll win before getting to the convention. But I can tell you if we didn’t, if we’re 20 votes short or if we’re 100 short and we’re at 1,100 and somebody else is at 500 or 400…I don’t think you can say that we don’t get it automatically. I think you’d have riots.
“I think you would see problems like you’ve never seen before. I think bad things would happen. I really do. I wouldn’t lead it, but I think bad things would happen.”
Donald Trump
An NBC reporter summed it up as follows: “As Trump indicated, there is a very real possibility he might lose the nomination if he wins only a plurality of delegates thanks to party rules that allow delegates to support different candidates after the initial ballot.
“In that context, the message to Republicans was clear on [March 16]: Nice convention you got there, shame if something happened to it.”
Anyone who’s ever watched a Mafia movie has heard similar threats: “You really ought to think about paying that protection money. Nice family you got–it would be a shame if anything happened to ’em.”
Paul Ryan, Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives, was quick to respond.
On March 17, he said that it was “unacceptable” for Trump to suggest there would be rioting if he was not chosen as the Republican nominee.
“Nobody should say such things in my opinion because to even address or hint to violence is unacceptable.”
Paul Ryan
And Ohio governor and Republican presidential candidate John Kasich chinned in. “Leaders don’t imply violence,” Kasich told “Face the Nation” on March 20.
“When he says that there could be riots, that’s inappropriate. I think you understand that, okay? Secondly, while we have our differences and disagreements, we’re Americans. Americans don’t say, ‘Let’s take to the streets and have violence.’
John Kasich
“I don’t even want to use the word ‘riots’ or ‘violence.’ That’s inappropriate. Our kids are watching. Now…that doesn’t mean I’m not running a positive campaign, but those kind of comments are way out of bounds. Frankly, they’re outrageous,” said Kasich.”
Yet, for all their public outrage, Republicans are no strangers to the uses of extortion and threats. Their tactics are straight out of the playbook of Adolf Hitler.
Robert Payne, author of the bestselling biography, The Life and Death of Adolf Hitler (1973), described the “negotiating” style of the Nazi dictator 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.”
In 1994, Newt Gingrich, then Speaker of the House of Representatives, shut down the Federal Government. Officially, the reason was a budget impasse with President Bill Clinton.
Unofficially–and in reality–the reason was altogether different: Clinton had forced him to sit in the back of Air Force One on a trip to Israel for the funeral of former prime minister Yitzhak Rabin.
“This is petty,” Gingrich confessed to startled reporters. “I’m going to say up front it’s petty, But I think it’s human.
“When you land at Andrews [Air Force Base, in Washington, D.C.] and you’ve been on the plane for 25 hours and nobody has talked to you and they ask you to get off by the back ramp….You just wonder, where is their sense of manners, where is their sense of courtesy?”
Gingrich’s childish verbal tirade was a public relations disaster for the Republicans. “Cry Baby,” screamed the New York Daily News, next to a picture of Gingrich in a diaper.
When House Democrats brought a poster-sized image of the cartoon onto the floor, the Republican majority forced them to remove it.
But the damage was done, and Republicans paid a fearful price at the polls for the shutdown and Gingrich’s candor about the reason for it, losing heavily in the House and Senate.
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.
Sign of The Black Hand
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 would not agree to the tax increases that Democrats wanted to impose on the wealthiest 1% as part of the bargain.
John Boehner
2016 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BBC, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964, CIVIL WAR, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOS, DANIEL DAY-LEWIS, DONALD TRUMP, EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION, FACEBOOK, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HUFFINGTON POST, LYNDON B. JOHNSON, MEDIA MATTERS, MITT ROMNEY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MOVIES, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SLAVERY, STEVEN SPIELBERG, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE INTERCEPT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, VOTER ID LAWS, VOTING RIGHTS ACT OF 1965
In Bureaucracy, Entertainment, History, Law, Military, Politics, Social commentary on March 17, 2016 at 12:36 pm
Steven Spielberg’s Lincoln is more than a mesmerizing history lesson.
It’s a timely reminder that racism and repression are not confined to any one period or political party.
At the heart of the film: Abraham Lincoln (Daniel Day-Lewis) wants to win ratification of what will be the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. An amendment that will forever ban slavery.
True, Lincoln, in 1862, had issued the Emancipation Proclamation. This—in theory—freed slaves held in the Confederate states that had seceded from the Union in 1861.
But Lincoln regards this as a temporary wartime measure. He fears that once the war ends, the Supreme Court may rule the Proclamation unconstitutional. This might allow Southerners to continue practicing slavery, even after losing the war.
To prevent this, Congress must pass an anti-slavery amendment.
But winning Congressional passage of such an amendment won’t be easy.
The Senate had ratified its passage in 1864. But the amendment must secure approval from the House of Representatives to become law.
And the House is filled with men–there are no women menmbers during the 19th century–who seethe with hostility.
Some are hostile to Lincoln personally. One of them dubs him a dictator–Abraham Africanus.” Another accuses him of shifting his positions for the sake of expediency.
Other members–white men all–are hostile to the idea of “equality between the races.” To them, ending slavery means opening the door to interracial marriage–especially marriage between black men and white women.
Perhaps even worse, it means possibly giving blacks–or women–the the right to vote.
In fact, the possibility that blacks might win voting rights arises early in the movie. Lincoln is speaking to a couple of black Union soldiers, and one of them is unafraid to voice his discontent. He’s upset that black soldiers are paid less than white ones–and that they’re led only by white officers.
He says that, in time, maybe this will change. Maybe, in 100 years, he guesses, blacks will get the right to vote.
(To the shame of all Americans, that’s how long it will eventually take. Not until the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 will blacks be guaranteed legal protection against discriminatory voting practices.)
To understand the Congressional debate over the Thirteenth Amendment, it’s necessary to remember this: In Lincoln’s time, the Republicans were the party of progressives.
The party was founded on an anti-slavery platform. Its members were thus reviled as “Black Republicans.” And until the 1960s, the South was solidly Democratic.
Democrats were the ones defending the status quo–slavery–and opposing freed blacks in the South of Reconstruction and long afterward.
In short, in the 18th century, Democrats in the South acted as Republicans do now. The South went Republican only after a Democratic President–Lyndon B. Johnson–rammed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 through Congress.
Watching this re-enactment of the 1865 debate in Lincoln is like watching the current Presidential campaign. The same mentalities are at work:
-
Those (in this case, slave-owners) who already have a great deal want to gain even more at the expense of others.
-
Those (slaves and freed blacks) who have little strive to gain more or at least hang onto what they have.
-
Those who defend the privileged wealthy refuse to allow their “social inferiors” to enjoy similar privileges (such as the right to vote).
During the 2012 Presidential race, Republicans tried to bar those likely to vote for President Barack Obama from getting into the voting booth. But their bogus “voter ID” restrictions were struck down in courts across the nation.
Listening to those opposing the amendment, one is reminded of Mitt Romney’s infamous comments about the “47%”:
“Well, there are 47% of the people who will vote for the president no matter what….
“Who are dependent upon government, who believe that–that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they’re entitled to healthcare, to food, to housing, to you name it. But that’s–it’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them.”
Put another way: “Who says people have a right to obtain medical care, food and housing? If they can’t inherit unearned wealth the way I did, screw them.”
In the end, it’s Abraham Lincoln who has the final word–and leaves his nation the better for it. Through diplomacy and backroom dealings (trading political offices for votes) he wins passage of the anti-slavery amendment.
The ownership of human chattel is finally an ugly memory of the American past.
The movie closes with a historically-correct tribute to Lincoln’s generosity toward those who opposed him–in Congress and on the battlefield. It occurs during Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address:
“With malice toward none, with charity for all….To bind up the nation’s wounds. To care for him who shall have bourne the battle, and for his widow and his orphan….”
This ending presents a vivid philosophical contrast with the increasingly mean-spirited rhetoric and policies of 2016’s Republican candidates for President–especially those of Donald Trump.
Watching Lincoln, you realize how incredibly lucky America was as a nation to have had such leadership when it was most urgently needed.
.
2000 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, 2012 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, 2016 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, AL GORE, BARACK OBAMA, CBS NEWS, CNN, DONALD TRUMP, ELECTORAL COLLEGE, FACEBOOK, GEORGE ORWELL, GEORGE W. BUSH, MARCO RUBIO, MEXICANS, MITT ROMNEY, MUSLIMS, NBC NEWS, NINETEEN-EIGHT-FOUR, POW'S, RAFAEL CRUZ, REPUBLICAN PARTY, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Politics, Social commentary on March 9, 2016 at 2:14 pm
The Donald Trump-Mitt Romney bromance began with an insult, courtesy of Trump:
“He’d buy companies, he’d close companies. He’d get rid of jobs. I’ve built a great company. I’m a much bigger businessman and have a much, much bigger net worth. I mean, my net worth is many, many, many times Mitt Romney.”
Then Trump had a change of heart: “Mitt is tough. He’s smart. He’s sharp. He’s not going to allow bad things to continue to happen to this country that we all love. So, Governor Romney, go out and get ’em. You can do it.”
And Romney swooned with delight: “I’m so honored to have his endorsement. There are some things that you just can’t imagine in your life. This is one of them.”
Mitt Romney and Donald Trump
But now the bromance is over, courtesy of a rousing, anti-Trump speech given by Romney at the University of Utah:
“Mr. Trump is directing our anger for less than noble purposes. He creates scapegoats of Muslims and Mexican immigrants, he calls for the use of torture and for killing the innocent children and family members of terrorists. He cheers assaults on protesters.
“He applauds the prospect of twisting the Constitution to limit First Amendment freedom of the press. This is the very brand of anger that has led other nations into the abyss.”
So how is Trump taking all this? “I don’t know what happened to him. You can see how loyal he is.
“He was begging for my endorsement. I could have said ‘Mitt, drop to your knees.’ He would have dropped to his knees.”
Fortunately for Trump, as his bromance with Romney has ended, another has emerged–with New Jersey Governor Chris Christie.
On February 26, Christie through his (political) weight behind Trump at a hastily-announced press conference in Fort Worth, Texas.
Chris Christie
Christie had not always been on such wonderful terms with the egocentric businessman. In fact, for months, the two had been rivals for the Presidency.
In a January speech before the New Hampshire primary, Christie said:
“Showtime is over. We are not electing an entertainer-in-chief. Showmanship is fun, but it is not the kind of leadership that will truly change America….
“If we are going to turn our frustration and anger with the D.C. insiders, the politicians of yesterday and the carnival barkers of today into something that will actually change American lives for the better, we must elect someone who has been tested.”
Then, without warning, Christie announced a sudden change of mind at a press conference in Fort Worth, Texas.
The previous night, Trump had been mauled by a surprisingly aggressive Marco Rubio during a CNN-hosted debate among the Presidential candidates. As a result, reporters gasped when Christie endorsed Trump and attacked Rubio:
“Part of his talking points now is to be entertaining and smile a lot now. Listen, it’s one act after another.”
Christie obviously felt it necessary to explain why he had gone from attacking Trump to promoting him:
“As a Republican I feel strongly about making sure that [Democratic front-runner] Hillary Clinton does not become president of the United states, and I believe Donald Trump is the best person–of those remaining–to do that.”
As for the attack made on Trump by former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney:
“I understand the things that Gov. Romney is saying, and he’s objected to. That’s his opinion, and I respect him as I always have, and he’s welcome to his view. I just happen to disagree with the conclusion that he comes to.”
By endorsing Trump, Christie became the first major establishment figure to validate the fitness of the former “reality TV star” to serve as President.
Considering Trump’s remaining opponents, it was not hard for Christie to reach that conclusion.
Texas United States Senator Rafael Cruz is an ideologue–and totally opposed to the pragmatic approach Christie brings to politics. And Christie genuinely dislikes Rubio.
In addition, Christie believed that Ohio Governor John Kasich–a moderate by Republican standards–could never secure his party’s Presidential nomination.
Ditto for neurosurgeon Ben Carson, who apparently believed his Right-wing party would elect another black man to succeed President Obama.
As for Trump: “This was an endorsement that really meant a lot. Chris is an outstanding man with an outstanding family, and this is the one endorsement that I’m really happy to get.”
While Christie and Trump share an innate aggressiveness and willingness to bully, that is not all they share.
In Never Enough, auhor Michael D’Antonio portrays Trump as a man with an insatiable appetite for wealth, attention, power, and conquest. The same can be said of Christie.
By taking on the role of Trump’s attack dog, Christie positions himself for the same role as vice presidential nominee. Or for a position such as Attorney General or Secretary of Homeland Security.
For those wishing to understand the realities of American political leaders, the best insight comes in a song popularized in George Orwell’s novel, 1984:
Under the spreading chestnut tree
I sold you and you sold me:
There lie they, and here lie we
Under the spreading chestnut tree.
2000 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, 2012 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, 2016 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, AL GORE, BARACK OBAMA, BLACKS, CBS NEWS, CHRIS CHRISTIE, CNN, DONALD TRUMP, ELECTORAL COLLEGE, FACEBOOK, GEORGE ORWELL, GEORGE W. BUSH, MARCO RUBIO, MEXICANS, MITT ROMNEY, MUSLIMS, NBC NEWS, NINETEEN-EIGHTY-0FOUR, POW'S, RAFAEL CRUZ, REPUBLICAN PARTY, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Politics, Social commentary on March 8, 2016 at 12:17 am
During the 2012 Presidential campaign, Donald Trump endorsed Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee to defeat President Barack Obama.
But that was before Trump decided to run for President in 2016. And the relationship between Trump and Romney has taken a considerably different turn.
On June 16, 2015, Trump declared his candidacy for the 2016 Republican Presidential nomination. Since then, he has been the first choice among the Republican base.
At first, he was dismissed as a bad joke–by Republican Presidential candidates as well as Democrats. Surely voters would reject a bombastic, thrice-married “reality show” host who had filed for corporate bankruptcy four times.
Yet from the outset Trump dominated the field–and a series of Republican debates. The other Republican candidates watched him with envy–and desperately tried to steal some of his limelight.
Donald Trump
Making one inflammatory statement after another, he offended one group of potential voters after another. These insults delighted his white, under-educated followers. But they alienated millions of other Americans who might have voted for him.
Among these:
- Mexicans: “They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.” He’s also promised to “build a great, great wall on our southern border and I will have Mexico pay for that wall.”
- Blacks: Trump retweeted an image of a masked, dark-skinned man with a handgun and a series of alleged crime statistics, including: “Blacks killed by whites – 2%”; “Whites killed by blacks – 81%.” The image cites the “Crime Statistics Bureau – San Francisco”–an agency that doesn’t exist.
- Illegal Aliens: Trump has threatened to forcibly deport millions of mostly Mexican and Central American residents.
- Muslims: Trump has boasted he would ban them from entering the United States–and revive waterboarding of terrorist suspects. He would require Muslims to register with the Federal Government. And he would close “some mosques” if he felt they were being used by Islamic terrorists.
- POWs: Speaking of Arizona U.S. Senator John McCain: “He’s a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured.” [Trump avoided military service–and Vietnam]
Many Republican members of Congress share–privately–Trump’s views on Hispanics, blacks and Muslims. But they realize that giving voice to such opinions can be politically suicidal.
Increasingly, the Republican party has become the bastion of aging white males. Even former President George W. Bush worked to win over Hispanics as Republican voters.
But the party’s increasingly strident anti-immigration rhetoric has alienated millions of Hispanics. And its open contempt for the nation’s first black President drove millions of blacks to the polls, where they handed Obama the White House–first in 2008, and again in 2012.
As a result, many Republicans now fear that Trump will gain their party’s Presidential nomination–and then lose in November, most likely to Hillary Clinton.
Even worse from their perspective: He might cost Republicans–who now dominate the House of Representatives and the Senate–one or both legislative bodies.
So many Republicans are now desperately trying to deny Trump the nomination. And one of these is Mitt Romney–the man Trump endorsed in 2012 as the best candidate to remove Obama from the White House.
Mitt Romney
On March 3, in a speech at the University of Utah, Romney outlined why a Trump Presidency would be a disaster for the nation (not to mention the Republicans).
Among his comments:
“If we Republicans choose Donald Trump as our nominee, the prospects for a safe and prosperous future are greatly diminished….
“If Donald Trump’s plans were ever implemented, the country would sink into prolonged recession….
“Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud. His promises are as worthless as a degree from Trump University….
“But you say, wait, wait, wait, isn’t he a huge business success? Doesn’t he know what he’s talking about? No, he isn’t and no he doesn’t.
“Look, his bankruptcies have crushed small businesses and the men and women who work for them. He inherited his business, he didn’t create it.
“And whatever happened to Trump Airlines? How about Trump University? And then there’s Trump Magazine and Trump Vodka and Trump Steaks and Trump Mortgage. A business genius he is not….
“Now let me turn to national security and the safety of our homes and loved ones. Mr. Trump’s bombast is already alarming the allies and fueling the enmity of our enemies.
“Insulting all Muslims will keep many of them from fully engaging with us in the urgent fight against ISIS, and for what purpose? Muslim terrorists would only have to lie about their religion to enter the country….
“Now, I’m far from the first to conclude that Donald Trump lacks the temperament to be president.
“After all, this is an individual who mocked a disabled reporter, who attributed a reporter’s questions to her menstrual cycle, who mocked a brilliant rival who happened to be a woman due to her appearance, who bragged about his marital affairs, and who laces his public speeches with vulgarity.
“Donald Trump says he admires Vladimir Putin, at the same time he has called George W. Bush a liar. That is a twisted example of evil trumping good.”
Thus Mitt Romney on the man who once endorsed him for President. In the next column, we’ll see what Trump thinks of the man he once endorsed for President.
2000 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, 2012 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, 2016 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, AL GORE, BARACK OBAMA, BLACKS, CBS NEWS, CHRIS CHRISTIE, CNN, DONALD TRUMP, ELECTORAL COLLEGE, FACEBOOK, GEORGE ORWELL, GEORGE W. BUSH, MARCO RUBIO, MEXICANS, MITT ROMNEY, MUSLIMS, NBC NEWS, NINETEEN-EIGHTY-FOUR, POW'S, RAFAEL CRUZ, REPUBLICAN PARTY, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Politics, Social commentary on March 7, 2016 at 12:23 am
In 2011, Donald Trump, the egocentric businessman and “reality star” of NBC’s “The Apprentice,” was toying with the idea of running for President in 2012.
On April 17, 2011, Trump said this about Mitt Romney, a possible rival and the former Massachusetts governor and front-runner GOP candidate:
“He’d buy companies, he’d close companies. He’d get rid of jobs. I’ve built a great company. I’m a much bigger businessman and have a much, much bigger net worth. I mean, my net worth is many, many, many times Mitt Romney.
“Mitt Romney is a basically small-business guy, if you really think about it. He was a hedge fund. He was a funds guy. He walked away with some money from a very good company that he didn’t create. He worked there. He didn’t create it.”
Donald Trump
Trump added that Bain Capital, the hedge fund where Romney made millions of dollars before running for governor, didn’t create any jobs. Whereas Trump claimed that he–Trump–had created “hundreds of thousands of jobs.”
So at least some observers must have been puzzled when Trump announced, on February 2, 2012: “It’s my honor, real honor and privilege, to endorse Mitt Romney” for President.
“Mitt is tough. He’s smart. He’s sharp. He’s not going to allow bad things to continue to happen to this country that we all love. So, Governor Romney, go out and get ’em. You can do it,” said Trump.
And Romney, in turn, had his own swooning-girl moment:
“I’m so honored to have his endorsement. There are some things that you just can’t imagine in your life. This is one of them.”
Mitt Romney
Throughout the 2012 Presidential race, Trump continued to “help” Romney–by repeatedly accusing President Barack Obama of not being an American citizen.
Had that been true, Obama would not have had the right to be President–since the Constitution says that only an American citizen can hold this position.
Of course, that was entirely what Trump wanted people to believe– that Obama was an illegitimate President, and deserved to be thrown out.
Come election night–and disaster for Romney–and Trump.
When it became clear that Romney was not going to be America’s 45th President, Trump went ballistic on Twitter.
Among his tweets:
- More votes equals a loss…revolution!
- Lets fight like hell and stop this great and disgusting injustice! The world is laughing at us.
- We can’t let this happen. We should march on Washington and stop this travesty. Our nation is totally divided!
- The phoney electoral college made a laughing stock out of our nation. The loser one!
- He lost the popular vote by a lot and won the election. We should have a revolution in this country!
To put Trump’s rants into real-world perspective:
According to Trump, the electoral process works when a Republican wins the Presidency. It only doesn’t work when a Democrat wins.
“We should march on Washington” conjures up images of another Fascist–Benito Mussolini–marching on Rome at the head of his Blackshirts to seize power.
“The phoney electoral college made a laughing stock out of our nation. The loser one!”
This is startling, on three counts:
First, the 2012 Republican Platform spoke lovingly about the need for preserving the Electoral College: “We oppose the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact or any other scheme to abolish or distort the procedures of the Electoral College.
“We recognize that an unconstitutional effort to impose ‘national popular vote’ would be a mortal threat to our federal system and a guarantee of corruption as every ballot box in every state would become a chance to steal the presidency.”
Second, the loser didn’t win: He lost. With votes still being counted (as of November 8) Obama got 60,652,238. Romney got 57,810,407.
Third, in 2000, Al Gore won the popular vote (50,999,897) to George W. Bush’s 50,456,002. But Bush trounced Gore in the Electoral College (271 to 266).
Still, that meant Bush–not Gore–would head the country for the next eight years. And that was perfectly OK with Right-wingers like Trump.
It was only when Obama won the Electoral College count by 332 to 206 that this was–according to Trump–a “travesty.”
And Trump’s solution if voters dare to elect someone other than Trump’s pet choice: “Revolution!”
This comes perilously close to advocating violent overthrow of the government. Otherwise known as treason–a crime traditionally punished by execution, or at least lengthy imprisonment.
Fast forward, to 2016–and the relationship between Trump and Romney looks considerably different.
On June 16, 2015, Trump declared his candidacy for the 2016 Republican Presidential nomination. Since then, he has been the first choice among the Republican base.
At first, he was dismissed as a bad joke–by Republican Presidential candidates as well as Democrats. Surely voters would reject a bombastic, thrice-married “reality show” host who had filed for corporate bankruptcy four times.
Yet from the outset Trump dominated the field–and a series of Republican debates. The other Republican candidates watched him with envy–and desperately tried to steal some of his limelight.
Making made one inflammatory statement after another, he offended one group of potential voters after another.
These insults delighted his white, under-educated followers. But they alienated millions of other Americans who might have voted for him.
2016 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BBC, BLACKS, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CLAUS VON STAUFFENBERG, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOS, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, GEORGE C. WALLACE, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HUEY LONG, HUFFINGTON POST, ILLEGAL ALIENS, JOHN KASICH, LATINOS, MARTIN NIEMOELLER, MEDIA MATTERS, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MUSLIMS, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REUTERS, ROBERT PAYNE, Ronald Reagan, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SS, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE INTERCEPT, THE LIFE AND DEATH OF ADOLF HITLER, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWILIGHT ZONE, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, WORLD WAR 11
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on March 2, 2016 at 12:02 am
On July 20, 1944, Colonel Claus Schenk von Stuaffenberg failed to assassinate Adolf Hitler with a bomb hidden in a briefcase.
He had carefully placed his briefcase near Hitler, who was standing next to a heavy oaken support of the conference table.
But after Stauffenberg left the room, Colonel Heinz Brandt, who stood next to Hitler, found the briefcase blocking his legs.
Hitler shows off the site of the explosion
So he moved it–to the other side of the heavy oaken support. When the bomb exploded, Hitler was partially shielded from its full blast. Brandt died, as did two other officers and a stenographer.
Not only did Hitler survive, but the plotters failed to seize the key broadcast facilities of the Reich.
This allowed Hitler to make a late-night speech to the nation, revealing the failed plot and assuring Germans that he was alive. And he swore to flush out the “traitorous swine” who had tried to kill him.
Among the first victims was the conspiracy’s leader, Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg. Standing before a makeshift firing squad at midnight, he cried: “Long live our sacred Germany!”
At least 7,000 persons were arrested by the Gestapo. According to records of the Fuehrer Conferences on Naval Affairs, 4,980 were executed.
If the conspiracy had succeeded and Germany had surrendered in July or August, 1944, World War II would have ended eight to nine months earlier. This would have meant:
- The Russians–who didn’t reach Germany until April, 1945–could not have occupied the Eastern part of the country.
- Millions of East Germans would have been spared the misery of living under Communist rule for 44 years.
- Many of the future conflicts between the United States and the Soviet Union over access to West Berlin and/or West Germany would have been prevented.
- Untold numbers of Holocaust victims would have survived because the concentration camps would have been shut down far earlier.
Thus, history can be altered by the appearance–or disappearance–of a single individual.
Which brings us back to Donald Trump.
Donald Trump
Since declaring his candidacy for the Presidency on June 16, 2015, Trump has been the first choice among the Republican base.
At first, he was dismissed as a bad joke–by Republican Presidential candidates as well as Democrats. Surely voters would reject an egotistical, thrice-married, “reality show” host who had filed for corporate bankruptcy four times.
Yet from the outset Trump dominated the field–and a series of Republican debates. His fellow Republican candidates enviously watched him–and desperately tried to steal some of his limelight.
Making made one inflammatory statement after another, he offended one group of potential voters after another:
- Mexicans: “They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.” He’s also promised to “build a great, great wall on our southern border and I will have Mexico pay for that wall.”
- Blacks: Trump retweeted an image of a masked, dark-skinned man with a handgun and a series of alleged crime statistics, including: “Blacks killed by whites – 2%”; “Whites killed by blacks – 81%.” The image cites the “Crime Statistics Bureau – San Francisco”–an agency that doesn’t exist.
- Illegal Aliens: Trump has threatened to forcibly deport millions of mostly Mexican and Central American residents.
- Muslims: Trump has boasted he would ban them from entering the United States–and revive waterboarding of terrorist suspects. He would require Muslims to register with the Federal Government. And he would close “some mosques” if he felt they were being used by Islamic terrorists.
- POWs: Speaking of Arizona U.S. Senator John McCain: “He’s a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured.”
Niccolo Machiavelli, the father of modern politics, warned against hurling threats and insults: “For neither the one nor the other diminishes the strength of the enemy.
Niccolo Machiavelli
“[Threats make] him more cautious, and [insults increase] his hatred of you, and [make] him more persevering in his efforts to injure you.”
But Trump revels in insulting anyone who dares to challenge him. He gleefully warns of the damage he will soon inflict on those who dare to oppose–or even criticize–him.
At the same time, he publicly exposes himself to a potential assassin virtually every day. And the mere presence of bodyguards is no guarantee against assassination.
Presidential candidate George C. Wallace was shot and paralyzed by a gunman while mingling with supporters in a Maryland shopping center in 1972. And President Ronald Reagan was shot and almost killed in 1981 while walking to his bulletproof limousine in Washington, D.C.
Both men were under protection by the U.S. Secret Service at the time.
* * * * *
In his bestselling 1973 biography, The Life and Death of Adolf Hitler, British historian Robert Payne harshly condemned the German people for the rise of the Nazi dictator:
“[They] allowed themselves to be seduced by him and came to enjoy the experience….[They] followed him with joy and enthusiasm because he gave them license to pillage and murder to their hearts’ content.”
There is a very real danger that millions of ignorant, hate-filled, Right-wing Americans will catapult Donald Trump–a man with an “odd psychology unleavened by kindness and charity”–into the Presidency.
And that this man–“who received no love, can give no love”–will assume all the awesome power that goes with that office.
If that happens, future historians–if there are any–may similarly condemn those Americans who stood by like “good Germans” and allowed their country to fall into the hands of a ruthless tyrant.
ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BBC, BLACKS, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CLAUS VON STAUFFENBERG, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOS, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, GEORGE C. WALLACE, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HUEY LONG, HUFFINGTON POST, ILLEGAL ALILENS, JOHN KASICH, LATINOS, MARTIN NIEMOELLER, MEDIA MATTERS, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MUSLIMS, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REUTERS, ROBERT PAYNE, Ronald Reagan, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SS, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE INTERCEPT, THE LIFE AND DEATH OF ADOLF HITLER, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWILIGHT ZONE, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, WORLD WAR ii
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on March 1, 2016 at 12:15 am
On July 20, 1944, Colonel Claus Schenk von Stuaffenberg tried to assassinate Adolf Hitler.
He had served with the Wehrmacht in Poland (1939), France (1940) and the Soviet Union (1941).
While serving in Tunisa, he was seriously wounded on April 7, 1943, when Allied fighters strafed his vehicle. He lost his left eye, right hand and two fingers of his left hand after surgery.
Colonel Claus Schenk von Stuaffenberg
Nevertheless, he now acted as the prime mover for the conspiracy among a growing number of German high command officers to arrest or assassinate Germany’s Fuehrer.
For most of these officers, the motive was craven: The “happy time’ of German victories was over. Germany was losing the war it had launched on the world in 1939–and now they feared the worst.
This was especially true now that the numerically superior forces of the Soviet Union had gone onto the offensive.
For Stauffenberg, there was another reason: His disgust at the horrors he had seen committed by his fellow Wehrmacht soldiers upon defenseless POW’s and civilians in Russia.
Thus, Stauffenberg–more than many Germans–knew firsthand the vengeance his country could expect if the “Thousand-Year Reich” fell.
Something must be done, he believed, to prove to the world that not all Germans–even members of the Wehrmacht–were criminals.
Most of the conspirators wanted to arrest Hitler and surrender to British and American forces–well before the much-feared Russians gained a toehold in Germany.
Stauffenberg didn’t want to arrest Hitler; he wanted to kill him. A live Hitler might eventually be rescued by his Nazi colleagues.
But Hitler was a closely-guarded target. He was surrounded by fanatical bodyguards who were expert marksmen. He often wore a bulletproof vest and a cap lined with three pounds of laminated steel.
Adolf Hitler
Bundesarchiv, Bild 146-1990-048-29A / CC-BY-SA 3.0 [CC BY-SA 3.0 de (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/de/deed.en)%5D
But his single greatest protection–he claimed–was an instinct for danger. He would suddenly change his schedule–to drop in where he was least expected. Or suddenly depart an event where he was expected to stay a long time.
On November 9, 1939, this instinct saved his life.
He had been set to give a long speech at a Munich beer hall before the “Old Fighters” of his storm troopers.
Sixteen years earlier on that day, in 1923, Hitler had led them in a disastrous attempt to overthrow the Bavarian government. Police had put down the effort, killing and wounding about a score of storm troopers in the process.
Hitler himself had later been arrested, tried and convicted for treason–and sentenced to a year’s imprisonment.
But instead of proving to be the end of Nazism, the “Beer Hall Putsch” turned Hitler into a national celebrity. And it launched his career as a legitimate, ultimately successful politician.
So Hitler was expected to speak to his longtime supporters for a long time that evening. Instead, he suddenly cut short his speech and left the beer hall. Forty-five minutes later, a bomb exploded inside a pillar–before which Hitler had been speaking.
Since then, a series of other assassination attempts had been made against Hitler. All of them involved time-bombs. And all of the would-be assassins were members of the German General Staff.
In one case, a bomb secretly stashed aboard Hitler’s plane failed to explode. In another, an officer who had a bomb strapped to himself unexpectedly found his scheduled meeting with Hitler called off. He had to rush into a bathroom to defuse the bomb before it went off.
So now it was the turn of von Stauffenberg. He would carry his bomb–hidden in a briefcase–into a “Hitler conference” packed with military officers.
But Stauffenberg didn’t intend to be a suicide bomber. He meant to direct the government that would replace that of the Nazis.
His bomb–also rigged with a time-fuse–would be left in the conference room while he found an excuse to leave. After the explosion, he would phone one of his fellow conspirators with the news.
Then, the coup–“Operation Valkyrie”–would be on.
Anti-Nazi conspirators would seize control of key posts of the government. The British and Americans would then be informed of Germany’s willingness to surrender. Provided, of course, that the vengeance-seeking Russians did not have a say in its postwar future.
The Wehrmacht and Schutzstaffel (SS) had killed millions of Russians. Many had died in combat. Others had been murdered as captives. Still more had been allowed to die by starvation and exposure to the notorious Russian winter.
So the Germans–both Nazi and anti-Nazi–knew what they could expect if soldiers of the Soviet Union reached German soil.
On July 20, 1944, Stauffenberg appeared at Hitler’s well-guarded military headquarters in East Prussia. Like all his other outposts, Hitler had named it–appropriately enough–“Wolf’s Lair.”
“Wolf’s Lair”
Stauffenberg entered the large, concrete building while the conference was in session. He placed his yellow briefcase next to Hitler–who was standing with his generals at a heavy oaken table. Then he excused himself to take an “urgent” phone call.
At 12:42 p.m. on July 20, 1944, Stauffenberg’s briefcase bomb erupted.
But, as if by a miracle, Hitler–and the Third Reich–survived.
.jpg&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FDonald_Trump&docid=oUQ97aEz8anNMM&tbnid=QsnpHu5vtl_y5M%3A&w=342&h=465&ved=0ahUKEwjN_t6ZzNDLAhUE0mMKHRRiAzcQxiAIAg&iact=c&ictx=1)
.jpg&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FDonald_Trump&docid=oUQ97aEz8anNMM&tbnid=QsnpHu5vtl_y5M%3A&w=342&h=465&ved=0ahUKEwiz15vwz7DLAhVBWWMKHYU2CXkQxiAIAg&iact=c&ictx=1)
2016 REPUBLICAN CONVENTION, ABC NEWS, AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, CBS NEWS, CHRIS MATTHEWS, CNN, CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS, DEBT CEILING, DONALD TRUMP, EXTORTION, FACEBOOK, HARDBALL, JOHN F. KENNEDY, JUDGE MERRICK GARLAND, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEWT GINGRICH, NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI, OBAMACARE, Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, REPUBLICANS, RICHARD WOLFFE, ROBERT PAYNE, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE LIFE AND DEATH OF ADOLF HITLER, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE PRINCE, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, U.S. SENATE, U.S. SENATOR MITCH MCCONNELL, U.S. SUPREME COURT, USA PATRIOT ACT, WARREN BUFFETT
REPUBLICANS: EXTORTION IS US: PART FOUR (END)
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on March 25, 2016 at 12:04 amIn September, 2013, President Barack Obama and Senate Democrats refused to knuckle under to yet another Republican extortion threat: Defund the Affordable Care Act (ACA) or we’ll shut down the government.
Republicans claimed it was Obama and Senate Democrats who refused to see reason and negotiate.
But then a Republican accidentally gave away the real reason for the shutdown.
“We’re not going to be disrespected,” Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.) told the Washington Examiner. “We have to get something out of this. And I don’t know what that even is.”
Marlin Stutzman
In short, Republicans–as admitted by Martlin Stutzman–were out to get “respect.” A member of the Crips or Bloods couldn’t have said it better.
The shutdown began on October 1, 2013–and ended 16 days later with even Republicans admitting it had been a failure.
President Obama, a former attorney, denounced House Republicans as guilty of “extortion” and “blackmail.” Had the President acted to prosecute such criminal conduct, the results would have been:
True, some prosecuted Republicans might have beaten the rap. But first they would have been forced to spend huge amounts of time and money on their defense.
And with 75% of Americans voicing disgust with Congress, most of those prosecuted might well have been convicted.
It would have been a long time before Republicans again dared to engage in such behavior.
The ancient Greeks believed: “A man’s character is his fate.” It is Obama’s character–and America’s fate–that he is more inclined to conciliation than confrontation.
Richard Wolffe chronicled Obama’s winning of the White House in his book Renegade: The Making of a President. He noted that Obama was always more comfortable when responding to Republican attacks on his character than he was in making attacks of his own.
Obama came into office determined to find common ground with Republicans. But they quickly made it clear to him that they only wanted his political destruction.
At that point, he should have put aside his hopes for a “Kumbaya moment” and applied what Niccolo Machiavelli famously said in The Prince on the matter of love versus fear:
Niccolo Machiavelli
From this arises the question whether it is better to be loved than feared, or feared more than loved. The reply is, that one ought to be both feared and loved, but as it is difficult for the two to go together, it is much safer to be feared than loved.
For it may be said of men in general that they are ungrateful, voluble, dissemblers, anxious to avoid danger and covetous of gain.
As long as you benefit them, they are entirely yours: they offer you their blood, their goods, their life and their children, when the necessity is remote. But when it approaches, they revolt….
And men have less scruple in offending one who makes himself loved than one who makes himself feared; for love is held by a chain of obligations which, men being selfish, is broken whenever it serves their purpose; but fear is maintained by a dread of punishment which never fails.
By refusing to vigorously prosecute acts of Republican extortion, President Obama has unleashed twin disasters upon himself and the United States:
First, Republicans have been encouraged to intensify their acts of aggression against him.
Their most recent act: Refusing to meet with federal appeals court judge Merrick Garland. Obama’s designated nominee to the Supreme Court after the February 13 death of Justice Antonin Scalia.
Kentucky United States Senator Mitch McConnell has flatly stated: There will be no Supreme Court hearings–not during regular business or a post-election lame-duck session.
Had Obama proceeded with indictments against Republican extortion in 2011 or 2013, McConnell–who supported the extortion attempts of those years–would now be desperately meeting with his lawyers.
Second, Republicans have unleashed their tactics of extortion against one another.
Donald Trump, their front-running Presidential candidate, has openly threatened to aim violence at Republican delegates who do not accept him as their nominee.
As Philip Klein, the managing editor of the Washington Examiner, recently wrote:
“Political commentators now routinely talk about the riots that would break out in Cleveland if Trump were denied the nomination, about how his supporters have guns and all hell could break loose, that they would burn everything to the ground. It works to Trump’s advantage to not try too hard to dispel these notions.”
Thus, those who submit to the aggression of criminals only encourage contempt–and increased aggression–from those same criminals.
Share this: