Until Proven False

Until proven false, I will report as definite fact that Michael Flynn, The Stain's choice for National Security Adviser, and his son, are operating an ISIS cell out of their Washington, D.C. townhouse, where they regularly throw parties which involve eating orphans alive while having sex with goats.

Things That Make America Great

What exactly does The Stain mean when he promises to 'Make America Great Again'?  Well, I don't believe he's ever spelled it out explicitly, but most observers believe it's a promise to return America to a time when things were better for white men without a college education --- The Stain's prime demographic.  And there's good reason to think that's what motivated that demographic to vote for him:

As for campaigns that pine for rosier economic times, in today's economy who wouldn't miss the job and income trends that prevailed from 1947 through the late 1960s? Manufacturing jobs were plentiful for young men without a college degree, and each cohort of men aged 25 to 29 earned more than three times as much as their fathers had made at a similar age. Since 1980, young men have earned less, on average, than their fathers at the same age.

There's no question that the post-WWII era through the mid-1960s was a golden age for America's working class, and specifically for the white working class.  Unfortunately, the middle class has been eroding steadily since then. And I don't blame anyone for wanting to see that trend reverse; I do, however, believe they will be sorely disappointed if they voted for The Stain thinking he's the right person to make that happen.

Many of The Stain's critics rightly point out that however rosy the 1950's may have been for the white working class, it wasn't such a great time for other groups.  Jim Crow laws were still enforcing racial segregation in the south, gays were still closeted, and women were still thought of as housewives rather than people.

There was, however, at least one other way in which the America of the 1950's was vastly preferable to today's America, and that concerns the integrity expected of public figures.

I just happened to watch the 1994 movie Quiz Show last night, about the quiz show scandals of the 1950's.  If you're not familiar with them, the short version is that in the early years of television, production companies, networks and sponsors were still defining the boundaries of what would and wouldn't fly in the new medium.  Quiz shows proved to be both wildly popular and cheap to produce, and for 3 or 4 years in the late 50's, they proliferated like bunnies.

And in the pursuit of ever-higher ratings, many shows crossed the line from honest quiz shows to scripted drama, to the point where contestants routinely received the answers to the questions before each show.

That's it.  A handful of quiz shows were rigged.  And when these facts were made public, it was considered a huge scandal.  There was a congressional investigation, and peoples' careers and reputations were ruined.  Americans actually cared that they had been lied to, and they shunned the people who told those lies.

Contrast that reaction to this from Trump surrogate Scottie Nell Hughes:

Far from demanding honesty and integrity from public figures --- like politicians --- America has descended to the point where someone can lie with wanton abandon, and receive more than 61 million votes for president.

In this respect, at least, I agree that America needs to become great again.  Unfortunately, America has chosen the worst possible person for that job.

Memo to All Who Voted for Jill Stein

I hope your 'principles' will keep you warm for the next 4 years.  While I grudgingly give Stein some credit for taking the initiative to drive for recounts/audits in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, everyone seems to be avoiding the elephant in the room, which is this:

If everyone who voted for Stein had instead voted for Clinton, she would be the president-elect, not The Stain.  Allow me to elaborate.  These are the current vote totals in the deciding states of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin as I write this:

	Michigan	Pennsylvania	Wisconsin
Trump	2,279,543	2,955,671	1,409,467
Clinton	2,268,839	2,906,128	1,382,210
Trump's Margin	10,704	49,543	27,257
Stein	51,463	49,678	30,980

I wasn't planning to devote any more time to bashing Stein or her supporters, but it's now beyond doubt that those of you who voted for Stein have Nadered us again.  If you voted for Stein because you thought Hillary is just as bad as The Stain, then either you're lying to yourself or you're simply deluded.  Take a look at everything The Stain has done in just the past 24 DAYS since the election and tell me we wouldn't have been far better off with Clinton.

And no, Stein voters certainly aren't the only reason Clinton lost, but they deserve their share of the blame.  Mostly they're culpable for picking up Republican talking points and attacking Clinton with them from the left, thus persuading thousands of moderate voters who otherwise would have been happy to vote for an honest, competent, mainstream Democrat to either vote for The Stain or stay home.  There's no way to be sure, of course, but I think it's a fair estimate that for every vote Stein got, there were 3 other voters who would have voted for Clinton if Stein and her supporters hadn't been so eager to do The Stain's work for him.  If that's even close to accurate, then without Stein selling The Stain's kool-aid, Clinton not only wins but it's not all that close.

And of course, now we can see that even though relatively few people voted for Stein, that alone was enough to put The Stain in the White House.

Are those principles of yours helping you to feel good right about now?

Operation Ignore

The Stain appears to be more interested in using his office to further his business interests than he is in, say, actually trying to defeat ISIS and keep America safe:

Trump on Tuesday received only his third intelligence briefing since he won the Nov. 8 presidential election, despite an offer from President Barack Obama of daily briefings, three of the officials said.

. . .

Trump's decision to forgo daily briefings and his delay in designating more transition advisers to engage with the intelligence agencies may reflect his focus on filling the top economic positions in his administration.

However, said the senior career official, it also may reflect the disinterest and distrust in US intelligence Trump has expressed during and after his presidential campaign.

I would say that The Stain's disdain for daily intelligence briefings is unprecedented, but unfortunately it's not.  Al Franken, who is now the junior senator from the great state of Minnesota, and my preferred candidate for president in 2020, wrote a nice overview of the early days of the George W. Bush administration, in what he called 'Operation Ignore':

On its 172nd day, Operation Ignore suffered a major blow. Already, the operation was becoming more and more difficult to sustain as the intensity of terror warnings crescendoed. Now, on August 6, CIA Director Tenet delivered a report to President Bush entitled, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.'' The report warned that al Qaeda might be planning to hijack airplanes. But the President was resolute: Operation Ignore must proceed as planned. He did nothing to follow up on the memo.

Actually, that's not entirely fair. The President did follow up, a little bit. Sitting in his golf cart the next day, Bush told some reporters, "I'm working on a lot of issues, national security matters.'' Then, Bush rode off to hit the links, before dealing with a stubborn landscaping issue by clearing some brush on his property. The next day, he followed up again, telling the press, I've got a lot of national security concerns that we're working on Iraq, Macedonia, very worrisome right now."

The similarities between the ignorant and self-involved George W. Bush before 9/11 and The Stain are more than concerning, but sadly not surprising.  Anyone who was paying attention before the election knew that The Stain already thinks he knows everything there is to know about national security.   They knew that The Economist Intelligence Unit rated a Stain presidency as a top threat to global security.  They knew that 50 Republican intelligence officials believe The Stain is a risk to "our country's national security and well-being."

In short, when the next attack comes --- and there is no doubt it will come, and it will be large and it will be horrific --- the responsibility for it will belong to the attackers, of course.  And to The Stain, for his hubris and his willful ignorance and his refusal to gain even a rudimentary understanding of the threats facing America.

And The Stain's supporters will own it, too.  So when they start demanding that we round up Muslims or Mexicans or foreigners, I will respond by handing them a mirror, and asking if the price we're all paying is worth it to have The Stain in the White House just because "he tells it like it is" or whatever other ignorant excuse made them decide it was a good idea to vote for him.

On the Subject of Torture . . . .

As long as we're discussing torture, I should point out that there is a certain subset of conservative thugs who justify their support for waterboarding by insisting that waterboarding is not torture.  Personally, I'm more inclined to accept the opinion of a Republican politician who has actually been tortured, or failing that, of someone who has actually been waterboarded.

So to Newt Gingrich, Ted Cruz, Karl Rove, Tom Cotton and anyone else who insists waterboarding is not torture, I'd like to make a suggestion.  Arrange to have yourselves waterboarded on live television, before a bi-partisan panel of witnesses.  If you do that, I promise I will strongly consider your opinion that waterboarding is not torture.

Until then, please shut the hell up.

On Torture: An Open Letter to Mike Pence

Mr. Pence,

Today on Face the Nation, you left open the possibility that the incoming administration will use waterboarding and other forms of torture on prisoners.  You refused to contradict the statements of your profane running-mate that he would approve not only waterboarding, but "more than that", regardless of whether it is effective as an interrogation technique, because "they deserve it anyway, for what they're doing".  Torture is inherently odious and immoral, and so it is exactly what I expect from your profane running-mate, but it is especially so because he is advocating torture of prisoners WHO HAVEN'T BEEN CONVICTED OF ANY WRONG-DOING VIA DUE PROCESS.

Apparently, despite your many years of experience in the House of Representatives, you need an ordinary citizen like me to remind you that torture is illegal under both U.S. and international law, immoral, and unconstitutional.  In January, you will take an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution, the 8th amendment of which reads:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

The current president, a man who is worth several thousand of you and your profane running-mate, and who is also a professor of constitutional law, understood his obligations under the Constitution, and correctly stated upon taking office:

First, I can say without exception or equivocation that the United States will not torture . . . . America's moral example must be the bedrock and beacon of our global leadership.

Since it seems that you don't understand this, you cannot faithfully carry out the responsibilities of the office for which you have been chosen.  I therefore urge that if you have any shred of honor, you must refuse the office of the Vice-Presidency, and you must persuade your profane running-mate to refuse the office of the Presidency as well.  I have no doubt that you will dismiss this suggestion, as I am sure you and your profane running-mate are both entirely without honor.  I also realize that it would create a constitutional crisis for our country for both the President and Vice-President elect to refuse the oath of office at this point.  However, the crisis it would cause would be far less than the crises we will face if you and your torture-loving crony are allowed to set foot in the White House.

I would further suggest that once you have left politics, that you both search for entry-level jobs in the service industry, possibly working as janitors at a halfway house or a juvenile detention facility.  You might learn some humility and some compassion for others, and whether you do or not, you would be doing more to make America great than you're likely to accomplish leading the government.

(Readers are encouraged to write their own letter to Mr. Pence, and are free to use this letter as a starting point, or copy it in its entirety.  For the next month or two, I would imagine that Mr. Pence can be contacted here.)

Surviving the Trumpocalypse: Part 1 - The Courts

Here's a study in contrasts.  In an entirely predictable development, The Stain's election victory has emboldened the more deplorable of his supporters to act on their worst impulses:

There have been 437 reported acts of verbal and physical harassment recorded by the Southern Poverty Law Center since voters elected Donald Trump president of the United States. 

 Appointments such as Steve Bannon to Trump's administration and a failure to seriously address the hateful Trump campaign rhetoric, the social justice watchdog organization says there’s no telling how high that number will grow. 

Fortunately, the Obama administration is still in office for another 62 days, which includes an Attorney General who takes the rule of law seriously:

Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced Friday that the Justice Department is investigating whether the dozens of incidents of intimidation and harassment reported in the days since the election qualify as federal hate crimes.

“The FBI is assessing, in conjunction with federal prosecutors, whether particular incidents constitute violations of federal law,” Lynch said in a videotaped statement.

Unfortunately, more than 61 million Americans either didn't understand or didn't care that this would happen, and decided it would be a good idea to put The Stain and his cronies in charge of the U.S. government for the next 4 years.  And unless the U.S. Senate does its job, Loretta Lynch will be replaced by an Attorney General who isn't quite so concerned with civil rights:

 Sessions defended Trump’s proposed ban on Muslims from entering the United States and Trump has embraced many of Sessions’ proposals, like “canceling federal funds to sanctuary cities,” slowing legal immigration and challenging the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of birthright citizenship. In January, a top aide to Sessions, Stephen Miller, joined the Trump campaign as senior policy adviser, and Sessions’ Chief of Staff Rick Dearborn is the executive director of Trump’s transition team.

In 1986, a bipartisan majority of the Senate Judiciary Committee rejected his nomination to a federal judgeship in the midst of charges of racial bias.

No matter who replaces Loretta Lynch as Attorney General, the Muslims, blacks, Latinos, LGBTQs and others who are the targets of The Stain's deplorables will be losing a powerful ally in the legal system.  This is why the most important and effective way those of us in the reality-based community can begin to fight back against The Stain is to support independent legal organizations who will step into the void left behind when the U.S. no longer has a competent Attorney General.  My recommendations are:

• The American Civil Liberties Union
• The Southern Poverty Law Center
• The Human Rights Campaign

The ACLU and SPLC are probably the foremost legal organizations for defending civil rights in America and fighting hate.  The Human Rights Campaign also defends civil rights, but it is focused on LGBTQ rights.  Pick your favorite, or pick them all.  If you can manage it, sign on to make regular monthly donations.  For the next four years, these organizations will be the best response we have to all forms of bigotry championed by The Stain and his supporters.

Of course, fighting them in the courts is just the beginning.