Trump Loves Fox & Evangelicals Love Supreme Court Pick….From all accounts Kavanaugh seems to be a fine person. Evangelicals didn’t necessarily view him as their preferred choice among the final 4 list, but they have high hopes for him. Trump happened to pick the one judge from the Federalist Society’s preordained list of conservative judges who on record in the past has questioned the legitimacy of indicting a president, or even investigating a president for potential crimes: president-picks-scotus
Such a conservative Supreme Court pick is the primary reason Trump got elected in the first place, particularly with his 80%+ support from evangelical voters. Was it worth it? Maybe Roe v. Wade might be repealed, coming at the cost of all the baggage that has come with this president. You cannot be an effective leader if your persona is exposed as a despicable lowlife, which Trump’s animus, chaos, dishonesty & divisiveness are becoming legendary as president. Any presidency is sure to become a disaster any time a president is devoid of redeemable personal traits & is corrupt/dishonest through & through. His lack of empathy, hair-triggered temperament, egotism & narcissism (Yes-Trump-is-a-narcissist-But
He’s Infatuated With Dictators
Trump has commended a number of dictators, including this one in the next link. Could this be what Trump’s vision for America might look like?: trump-once-said-he-could-get-a
A new report on the state of the world’s democracies makes for some grim reading. Writing in the Washington Post, the authors say the study “shows that democracy’s decline is gaining momentum: One-third of the world’s population lives in a backsliding democracy,” and within that tally of declining democracies is the United States itself. The outlook in the United States is especially dark, say authors Anna Luhrmann and Matthew Wilson, with experts’ ratings sliding downward in “precipitous and unprecedented” fashion. There seems little room to argue any of these things. It is self-evident that the Republican Congress has no interest in curtailing corruption within the Trump administration or, in fact, even allowing full investigation of those acts. They are steadfastly blocking opposition efforts to do so, and will apparently continue to do so regardless of what else federal investigators discover. And the Constitution, apparently, has been reduced to a petty slogan. If there is good news it is that all of this could be reversed if Americans saw fit to boot the lackeys responsible for it. A Democratic House would almost certainly resume the investigative role that Republicans abandoned entirely, after winning a presidential election; we might even come to the conclusion that allowing foreign actors to run roughshod over our elections is something that perhaps ought to be prevented in the future. The larger problems are the role of the ultra-rich in singlehandedly funding whichever campaigns and laws they most desire and a national political press that is forever devoted to both-sidesing our political decay into smarming nothingness.
Lie after Lie after Lie
A proven liar can never be trusted as a leader. His provable lies in a year & a half serving as president is astonishingly well beyond 3000! Trump is a terrible leader because he’s lost all credibility with those of us living in the real world, not the alternate-reality echo-world. See the ramifications in excerpts from trumps-incessant-lies-are
To whatever extent it is possible to become accustomed to the president of a major liberal democracy continuously lying, day after day, the world has grown more or less used to President Donald Trump’s practice of incessantly spraying his unique stream of falsehoods across social media, political rallies and assorted public events. Editors at major media organizations have grappled with the complications of deciding whether or when to label the president’s untruths as “lies,” noting that a lie requires a conscious intention to deceive and knowledge that a statement is incorrect—and it is not always clear that is the case when Trump fires off one of his regular whoppers.
What is beyond dispute is that Trump has turned fact-checking into a growth industry, recently accelerating the speed of its assembly line to a rate that makes it nearly impossible to keep up. At a rally in Minnesota late last month, fact-checkers clocked him making a false statement every two minutes. Multiple databases have recorded thousands of lies or untruths since he took office. Whatever the reason for the unprecedented pace of falsehoods, there is no question that the practice has major implications. Beyond the ethical and political ones, Trump’s made-up world has a serious, and potentially devastating, impact on policy.
In recent weeks, Trump has falsely claimed that “crime in Germany is way up” since Germany accepted large numbers of refugees; that the North Korean nuclear problem is solved; that the major steel manufacturer U.S. Steel “is now expanding and opening six new plants”; that economic growth under President Barack Obama never broke 2 percent; that the U.S. is being invaded by Central American gang members and that he has “watched ICE liberate towns from the grasp of MS-13”; and on and on and on. All of these claims, along with thousands of others, are simply untrue. Trump deliberately lies to boost his accomplishments, smear his critics and make it impossible to know what the truth is. He is also woefully uninformed. He does not read much at all, and he does not trust people who disagree with him, magnifying the echo chamber effect that has touched other presidents but none as much as Trump, who appears to have an exceedingly low tolerance for criticism.
There are three possible explanations behind Trump’s manufacturing of reality. The first is that it amounts to “gaslighting,” a conscious effort to disorient, to create doubts about what is real and what isn’t, ultimately undercutting his critics and injecting doubt into any fact that is unhelpful to his goals. The second possibility is that Trump is simply misinformed, that he is not lying but repeating false information that he picks up on his unvaried diet of right-wing media, mainly Fox News, which he watches religiously. Finally, there is the controversial explanation that Trump is mentally unstable, perhaps suffering from some type of cognitive decline. Trump creates a fantasy world in order to boost his own standing. But when his aides and loyal media do not question it, his alternative facts become real in his mind, forming the foundation for some of his disastrous policy decisions. Policies built on lies can only succeed when the verdict of their effectiveness is itself a lie.
More on Rudy as We Need to Protect Rosenstein & Mueller
Rudy’s crazy circus-show hit our TV screens again! Coming out of his hiding, TV lawyer Rudy took to the Sunday talk show circuit to resume spreading his verbal manure. As the Trump legal strategy is to smear Mueller so their base won’t believe a word of whatever criminal activities special counsel uncovers, the Mueller team just goes about their business in a professional manner, not leaking & not saying a word to refute the relentless attacks against them: the-giuliani-deception-t
But it’s already been established Russia did interfere in our election while numerous crimes were committed, so we need to rely on Mueller’s team to patch all the evidence together, getting to the bottom of everything that happened related to these attacks on our constitutional democracy. The American people must learn the truth, which following the rule of law & preserving our democracy require putting the nonsense coming from the Trump camp aside, allowing Mueller to conclude his work & then letting the facts speak for themselves. See logical arguments not heard inside the echo-bubble as explained in these excerpts from Baseless-attacks-on-Rober
The argument du jour in partisan circles today goes like this: Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation should end because of the alleged bias of FBI agents who resented candidate Donald Trump. Some conservative lawyers have expanded this argument by claiming that the Russia investigation is the “fruit of the poisonous tree.” They are wrong on the law, wrong on the facts, and they should know better. As former United States attorneys, we have experience prosecuting federal crimes. The Russia investigation had a proper factual and legal foundation, and recent writings are nothing more than an improper effort to wrap inapplicable legal doctrines around discredited fiction to undermine the rule of law. If we are to preserve the bedrock principles of our democracy, we must call out these partisan attacks for what they are, illegitimate and baseless, and let the special counsel conclude his work.
Start with the unsound arguments assembled to end the investigation, based on the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine, which is merely a way for defendants to exclude at trial evidence that was illegally obtained. We have been on the receiving end of defense counsel pitches that an investigation should end for some perceived flaw. Our response is the same: Take it up with the judge. Court is the place to challenge the propriety of any criminal investigation, and only after charges are filed. In this case, the FBI properly initiated an investigation into Russia’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, including whether Trump campaign associates were involved. The FBI must adhere to the guidelines for domestic FBI operations that were last updated by former Attorney General Michael Mukasey. The guidelines state that “preliminary investigations may be initiated on the basis of any allegation or information indicative of possible criminal or national security-threatening activity.” This includes information indicating that an individual or organization may be a target of attack or recruitment in connection with criminal activity. In order to collect evidence through a wiretap, the FBI must show a federal judge that probable cause exists.
Based on public reporting, which is likely only the tip of the iceberg, there was more than sufficient information indicating possible criminal or national security-threatening activity for the FBI to open an investigation into Russian interference. We would be stunned if, based on these facts, the FBI had not initiated an investigation. Indeed, the Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee acknowledged long ago that Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos set off the investigation by bragging about Russia offering him “dirt” on Hillary Clinton. This was reported to the FBI by the Australian government after hacked Democratic National Committee emails began to appear online months later. Based on his own acknowledgement in public reporting, we know that Carter Page, who had long been on the FBI’s radar due to recruiting efforts by the Russian intelligence agencies, joined the Trump campaign, which then approved his trip to Moscow in July 2016. These are the facts that have been publicly reported. As with any investigation, there are many more facts that we will not know until the work is done.
Much has been made of the messages between FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page as a reason to terminate the investigation. Their texts criticizing candidate Trump were inappropriate, but after a yearlong investigation, the Justice Department inspector general “did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that these political views directly affected the specific investigative decisions that we reviewed.” Indeed, the inspector general found evidence that in some instances Strzok and Page advocated for more aggressive investigative measures against Clinton. Courts have long held that motives of law enforcement are irrelevant in deciding whether a charging decision was lawful as long as there is probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed. All this is to say that the Mueller investigation, legally and factually, is not “fruit of the poisonous tree.” Do not just take our word for it, as the five guilty pleas speak for themselves. The defense attorneys representing these individuals, under oath in open court, disagree that critical evidence used to open the investigation was obtained illegally. Despite having access to nonpublic information, these five defendants never claimed that the FBI’s investigation was improperly predicated or the “fruit of the poisonous tree.” Those are just the guilty pleas. The special counsel has already resulted in federal grand jury charges against 23 individuals or entities with ties to Russia and the Trump campaign.
Mueller’s recent court filing demonstrates that Vladimir Putin is still meddling in our elections and underscores the high stakes for our country. The intelligence community remains confident the Russian government directed the hacking of emails from the Democratic National Committee and Clinton’s campaign chairman, and that the disclosures of these alleged hacked emails on sites like WikiLeaks are consistent with Russian efforts. We must get to the bottom of what happened. Curbing Russian aggression must be a priority for the United States. We all need to put patriotism ahead of party. We still believe in American values that must always endure. No one is above the law, and people should be held responsible for crimes. Those are the principles of our democracy that we swore to defend. This is not a time for partisan misdirection dressed up as legalese. Let the facts come out. Let the special counsel complete his investigation.
Fox Fake News
We’ll start with Stelter giving an excellent monologue on his Sunday show, explaining the corrupt relationship Trump has with his sycophant TV network, including the feedback loop & large Trumpeter viewership that our prez appeals to & governs by. A Fox management decision a few years ago based on internal research determined a pro-Trump narrative was good for their bottom line, since much of their audience was already mentally preconditioned to scorched-earth nihilistic messaging from years of brainwashing. That crowd had long been immersed in extreme rightwing talk radio & conspiratorial internet websites/social media groups, with Fox succumbing to that diet of false rhetoric following the height of the tea party movement. Especially view the 2-minute video with Stelter giving his comments inside cnns-stelter-blasts-tru
mp-hannity-relationship-lets- just-underscore-how-weird. More on that odd/unprecedented Trump-Fox relationship are revealed in cnns-reliable-sources-blasts-f ox-news-ties-to-trump-administ ration-in-excruciating-detail. As a showman & celebrity TV star, Trump LOVES positive coverage! Much like his great friends & dictators in Russia & North Korea enjoy, the prez seeks to suppress a free press so the American people only hear the distorted spin from the official state-run media, which Trump would dub friendly Fox News & the rest of the echo with that honor: trump-goes-after-nyt-washingto
n-post-again-theyll-be-out-of- business-in-7-years. If the prez achieves his ultimate fantasy of becoming dictator, the likes of WaPo & NYTimes really would go out of business, since Trump would ban them. More & more Fox fake news is serving a role similar to North Korean TV, embellishing their leader with praise while ignoring or rebutting the criticisms. So yes, were Trump to entirely get his way, Fox & the echo would become the lone media permitted. Trump recently said he wants the American people to stand up & cheer him whenever he comes into their presence, much like the North Korean people do for Jong Un, which would only be possible if all the news originates from the Trump cheerleading channels.
The evil nature of Fox fake news has long been established. Even before the Fox early morning & evening shows became a bastion for lies & conspiracies starting a few years ago, well prior to that the network was an immoral cesspool of moral debauchery & sexual abuse throughout the Roger Ailes-Bill O’Reilly era. Fox still retains a show host who has no business still being on the air: why-does-fox-news-steve-d
I suppose when you’ve been accused multiple times of being a sexual predator as Trump has, those types of things must not bother him: accused-sexual-predator-trump-
Those who only watch Fox & don’t take in any real news sources, they’re missing what’s actually happening out there. Not only is it pathetic when we have so many misinformed citizens, but it’s particularly disastrous when our president actually governs based on Fox fake news: sam-seder-if-you-watch-fox-day
Supreme Court Pick & Evangelicals
I’m simply embarrassed for my fellow evangelicals that they would be so given over to deception & hypocrisy in their unflinching support for a leader defining moral degradation. Any short-term gains made on the abortion issue for now are likely to be obliterated by the stunning damage being done to the credibility of the faith itself. In Matthew 28:18–20 are the biblical passages known as The Great Commission, where Jesus instructs his followers to spread his message to the whole world. It’s tragic when that message starts to ring hollow by the evangelical church’s modern-day followers, when the world perceives the evangelical community as so willing to align itself with Trump’s irrepressible brand of immorality & wickedness. And some of the claims evangelicals use to justify their faith in Trump are downright embarrassing. Trump is no more Cyrus the Great than Obama was the Antichrist.
The GOP base is giddy over the prospect of a conservative court should this new Supreme Court pick get confirmed, which is likely, but let me help temper their enthusiasm. Kavanaugh does leave a very large paper trail of opinions to review, no doubt giving his opposition plenty of fodder. Hinting a president should get a pass on investigations & indictments is a biggie he’ll be grilled on. As he is conservative & likely an opponent of Roe v. Wade, plus Dems are still stinging from Obama pick Merrick Garland not getting any consideration in 2016, this Trump pick will likely gin up the Dem voting base more than ever, especially women. If a blue wave sweeps in a Dem Congress, plus an unpopular Trump could help Dems win the White House the next decade if not a generation, it will give liberals plenty of time to undo whatever a current conservative court does.
If that evangelical love for Trump is all about abortion, let me also surmise in getting more conservatives on the Supreme Court, most any GOP president could have done the job. But in making Trump president, look at all the hideous things evangelicals needed to overlook in voting for & still supporting him: so-you-want-a-conservative-sup
It is perhaps an open question whether Trump’s candidacy represents a true change in evangelicals’ DNA or whether it simply revealed previously hidden traits, but the shift from values to nostalgia voter has undoubtedly transformed their political ethics. The clearest example of evangelical ethics bending to fit the Trump presidency is white evangelicals’ abandonment of their conviction that personal character matters for elected officials. In 2011 and again just ahead of the 2016 election, PRRI asked Americans whether a political leader who committed an immoral act in his or her private life could nonetheless behave ethically and fulfill their duties in their public life. In 2011, consistent with the “values voter” brand and the traditional evangelical emphasis on the importance of personal character, only 30 percent of white evangelical Protestants agreed with this statement. But with Trump at the top of the Republican ticket in 2016, 72 percent of white evangelicals said they believed a candidate could build a kind of moral dike between his private and public life. In a head-spinning reversal, white evangelicals went from being the least likely to the most likely group to agree that a candidate’s personal immorality has no bearing on his performance in public office.
Fears about the present and a desire for a lost past, bound together with partisan attachments, ultimately overwhelmed values voters’ convictions. Rather than standing on principle and letting the chips fall where they may, white evangelicals fully embraced a consequentialist ethics that works backward from predetermined political ends, bending or even discarding core principles as needed to achieve a predetermined outcome. When it came to the 2016 election, the ends were deemed so necessary they justified the means. As he saw the polls trending for Trump in the last days before the election, in no small part because of the support of white evangelicals, Russell Moore was blunt, lamenting that Trump-supporting evangelicals had simply adopted “a political agenda in search of a gospel useful enough to accommodate it.”
White evangelicals have entered a grand bargain with the self-described master dealmaker, with high hopes that this alliance will turn back the clock. And Donald Trump’s installation as the 45th president of the United States may in fact temporarily prop up, by pure exertions of political and legal power, what white Christian Americans perceive they have lost. But these short-term victories will come at an exorbitant price. Like Esau, who exchanged his inheritance for a pot of stew, white evangelicals have traded their distinctive values for fleeting political power. Twenty years from now, there is little chance that 2016 will be celebrated as the revival of White Christian America, no matter how many Christian right leaders are installed in positions of power over the next four years. Rather, this election will mostly likely be remembered as the one in which white evangelicals traded away their integrity and influence in a gambit to resurrect their past.
Meanwhile, the major trends transforming the country continue. If anything, evangelicals’ deal with Trump may accelerate the very changes it was designed to arrest, as a growing number of non-white and non-Christian Americans are repulsed by the increasingly nativist, tribal tenor of both conservative white Christianity and conservative white politics. At the end of the day, white evangelicals’ grand bargain with Trump will be unable to hold back the sheer weight of cultural change, and their descendants will be left with the only real move possible: acceptance.
I personally subscribe to the theory abortion rights should be less of a political issue, & more a cultural issue which can be influenced as a matter of faith. I just don’t see any pro-life Supreme Court decision being sustained without changing the hearts & minds of the people. I’d also like to point out again voting for president based on an overriding adherence to this singular issue, can bring upon our nation the general disaster we’re dealing with now in an unhinged president. So yes, I do agree with this thoughtful writer as seen in excerpts from pro-lifers-should-focus-less-o
In reality, there is no such thing as settled law; any constitutional issue is subject to revision — and even reversal if enough justices say it is. “Settled law” is for the most part just another tool in the spin box of partisans who favor one side or the other. If an entire nation can be judged for its sins, pro-lifers believe legalized abortion is among the greatest sins ever committed by the United States as a whole, right up there with slavery. Exact numbers are impossible to know, but the consensus seems to be that about 60 million abortions have been performed since the law took effect. For supporters of abortion rights, that is 60 million women who exercised their right to make their own health-care choices about their own bodies. For opponents of such rights, that’s 60 million souls killed in the womb, 60 million children who were deprived of their right to be born, to grow up and to contribute to our society. So divided are we on abortion that we usually can’t even agree on how to talk about it. Are you pro-life or anti-choice? Are you pro-choice or pro-abortion? Is it a fetus or an unborn baby? Is it merely part of a woman’s body or a separate human being with its own heartbeat and divine spark?
For me, opposing abortion is not just a religious precept, it’s a common-sense one. It is illogical that we celebrate miraculous scientific advancements that allow us to save lives in the womb at earlier and earlier stages — including in utero surgeries — and yet we say those same lives at the same stages of development are arbitrarily subject to being aborted. An unborn child is not deserving of life based on whether it is wanted, any more than whether you and I are wanted determines our right to live. But while I am pro-life, I don’t worry much about Roe v. Wade. For me, outlawing abortion is much like the failed effort to enforce prohibition during the 1920s. The problem is not the legality of the practice; it’s that there is a demand for it at all. I have often argued that pro-lifers should focus more on changing hearts and less on rolling back laws. If we believe what we say we believe — that every unborn child is a gift from God and deserves to be cherished — we should focus on that message and convince more people of its merit. When Americans agree on that, it won’t matter whether abortion is legal, any more than it matters that it’s legal to chop off your own hand. Even if Roe v. Wade is soon overturned, pro-lifers shouldn’t celebrate too much. Abortion will still be in demand, because hearts haven’t yet been changed.
Recent Comments