Crisis in Faith [Lawrence O'Donnell]

If you have the resources to listen to the Lawrence O'Donnell, MSNBC broadcast of Wednesday, July 6, 2023. I highly recommend it. It was titled A Crisis in Faith. In his presentation, he likened his faith in the Supreme Court to his religious faith. His father was a lawyer and he watched, as an 11-year-old, his father argue and win a case in the Supreme Court. He points out that, this SCOTUS is not of the same caliber or morality of the courts of his experience.

I transcribed the first 20 minutes of this broadcast that included an interview with Jamelle Antoine Bouie, a columnist for the NY Times. Mr. Bouie's comments are paragraphed with a [JB] header. All other content is from Lawrence O'Donnell.

----------

A Crisis in Faith

Lawrence O’Donnell, MSNBC, Wednesday, 7/5/23

[note, the following was done using voice recognition and some errors in transcription may be present]

It was in a classroom at a Catholic High School in Boston, where I first heard the phrase, crisis of faith. It was during religion class that the priest told us about a crisis of faith that he had some years earlier. For priests, the crisis of faith is losing the belief in God. It is so common for priests to have a crisis of faith. They have a term for it. And they have a process to deal with. Priests leave their priestly duties temporarily until the crisis of faith passes, or permanently if it doesn't. Experiencing a crisis of faith for the last year or so or so and have. Not knowing quite what to say about it or who to talk to about it. There are priests who specialize in counseling Catholic priests who are experiencing a crisis of faith.

But I'm not sure who to turn to for my crisis of faith. It is a crisis of faith. In what has been a God-like presence in my life? When I was baptized into the Catholic faith at birth, my father was a Boston police officer by the time I was in high school learning. About a Catholic priest having a crisis of faith. My father was a lawyer who had already argued and won the case in the United States Supreme Court. I was there in the Supreme Court that day when my father made his case to the justices. I was 11 years old. I had been in many churches and cathedrals by the time I was 11 and had seen monsignors of Cardinals on the altar but had never experienced more majesty in our world than sitting there, looking up at the Warren Court.

There was the Republican-appointed Chief Justice for Warren, flanked by legends on both sides of him, including the most liberal member of the court, William O Douglas, appointed by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. This was the court. But ordered the desegregation of public schools in America in 1954. This was the court that found state laws banning interracial marriage to be unconstitutional. Earl Warren had been the Chief Justice of the United States every day of my life.

Thurgood Marshall would join the Warren Court in its last years and personally represent as the first African American member of the Supreme Court the steady march of social progress that the Warren Court guided this country through using, we then thought, something as sacred as the 10 Commandments, the Constitution of the United States. We did not think that Chief Justice Warren and Justice Douglas and Justice Brennan and Justice Marshall and other legends of the Warren Court were delivering this progress, we thought the Constitution was delivering that process. We thought that the Warren Court was employing the most refined level of legal scholarship possible to reach its constitutional pronouncements, and no other result was possible.

My father lived in awe of the Supreme Court, and so did his children. It was a religious-like law. We never talked about who appointed the justices after they were appointed because it didn't seem particularly relevant. We thought Richard Nixon was a truly terrible, indeed criminal president. But his appointments to the Supreme Court were not bad. The court survived the Nixon years without any questions about its legitimacy, the Court, led by a Chief Justice appointed by Richard Nixon in a unanimous opinion, ordered Richard Nixon to hand over audio tapes that destroyed the Nixon presidency and forced Richard Nixon to resign the presidency.

In 1973, the Republican-dominated Supreme Court delivered the opinion on Roe versus Wade that allowed every pregnant woman in America to decide whether to carry that pregnancy. And so my faith in the Supreme Court remains strong no matter who was president.

Then came Senator Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump, who delegitimized the Supreme Court in a way that had been unthinkable until 2016, when Mitch McConnell refused to allow even a confirmation hearing for President Obama's last appointee to the Supreme Court, Merrick Garland. By forcing that Supreme Court seat to remain open for a year, Donald Trump was able to name Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. And so, whenever you see the name Gorsuch on a Supreme Court opinion, you should be seeing the name Garland. The word Gorsuch is an illegitimate presence in the Supreme Court's opinions. And takes its place in those opinions only through the corruption of the Supreme Court confirmation process brought by Republican Senator Mitch McConnell and completed by the most corrupt president in history, Donald Trump.

Neil Gorsuch does not evidence a whiff of embarrassment about his illegitimate placement on the Supreme Court. The, pardon the expression, affirmative action it took by Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump to get him on the Supreme Court. This last year is the year in which the United States Supreme Court has entered the most publicly corrupt phase of its entire history.

It is entirely possible that 200 years ago there were forms of corruption involving Supreme Court justices that never became public and historians never found. That's possible. But based exclusively on the public record, it is undeniable that the current court, this Republican-dominated Roberts court, is the most corrupt in history. And they are corrupt on two fronts. One, extreme financial improprieties and obvious financial conflicts of interest with billionaire litigants whose cases appear before the Supreme Court.

But the much graver corruption in the Supreme Court, the corruption that affects the daily lives of all of us is the corruption of Supreme Court scholarship. Is legal scholarship, scholarship if you can just make up stuff? That is the question. I've been privately asking myself for over a year now. And that is the essence of my crisis of faith. Where I once faithfully believed that the Warren Court followed by the Burger Court were using the most refined techniques of legal scholarship to deliver to us the true meaning of the Constitution, I now believe the Republican justices on the Supreme Court are just making it up. And they are doing that in a way that scholars cannot possibly do in other areas of scholarship, like mathematics or chemistry or biology. And so we have a Supreme Court whose final decision of the year was based on a person who was made-up. A person who does not exist.

The Republicans on the Supreme Court decided, as Justice Sonia Sotomayor says in her dissent, that quote, “a particular kind of business, though open to the public, has a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class. The Court does so for the first time in its history by issuing this new license to discriminate in a case brought by a company that seeks to deny same-sex couples before the equal enjoyment of its services, the immediate symbolic effect of the decision is to mark gays and lesbians for second class status. In this way, the decision itself inflicts a kind of stigmatic harm on top of any harm caused by denials of service. The opinion of the court is quite finally a notice that reads Some services may be denied to same-sex couples.”

It was just the day before, the Supreme Court issued that opinion, thanks to Melissa Grant reporting in The New Republic, that the same-sex couple named in the lawsuit that reached the United States Supreme Court was proven not to exist. That same-sex couple did not even exist. The lawsuit falsely claimed that a same-sex couple named Stuart and Mike wanted to have a website made for their upcoming wedding. The lawsuit included a phone number for the couple, which Melissa Grant called to discover that Stewart has been married to a woman for many years and has a daughter and had no idea that his first name and phone number appeared in a case before the United States Supreme Court and was used to deny other people their rights. But because the opinion had already been sent to the printer, there was nothing that the Roberts Court was going to do about the fraud perpetrated on the Supreme Court.

And if the court is just making stuff up? They obviously don't care about details like the people who are activating the case in front of them actually existing. That same Supreme Court ruled against what it incorrectly believes is Harvard College’s admissions policy. Republicans on the Supreme Court showed an unrelenting ignorance about the 387-year history of Harvard admissions policy by insisting that Harvard must stop the practice of admitting any student solely because of the color of the student's skin. Harvard has never admitted anyone solely for that reason, and so the Republican-controlled Supreme Court was making a ruling based on a myth that will have next to no effect on Harvard's actual admissions policy.

Many wise observers of the court have been publicly sharing in my crisis of faith without using that phrase. Norm Ornstein was for most of the decades of his exemplary professional work in Washington as a congressional scholar known and trusted for a complete absence of partisanship in his scholarship. The Trump years have left Norm Ornstein standing very clearly on one side of our partisan divide, but still, as always, speaking the truth about Washington institutions, including the Supreme Court. Norm Ornstein says quote, “it is not just rulings the Roberts Court is making they created out of whole cloth of bogus major questions doctrine. They made a mockery of standing. They rewrite laws to fit their radical ideological preferences that have unilaterally blown up the legitimacy of the court.”

When the Roberts court ruled last week on President Biden's student debt relief plan, Chief Justice John Roberts leaned on something he called the major questions doctrine, which, as Supreme Court reporter Ludwick points out is not really a doctrine at all. That opinion written by Chief Justice Roberts provoked the dissent by Justice Elena Kagan, which seems to reveal a crisis of faith much more severe than mine.

An actual member of the Supreme Court now seems to have lost faith in the Supreme Court. In her dissent to the Chief Justice 's opinion on student loan relief. Justice Kagan wrote, “from the first page to the last, today's opinion departs from the demands of judicial restraint. At the behest of a party that has suffered no injury, the majority decides a contested public policy issue properly belonging to the politically accountable branches and the people they represent. That is a major problem not just for governance, but for democracy too. Congress is, of course, a democratic institution. It responds, even if imperfectly, to the preferences of American voters. And agency officials though not themselves elected, serve a president with the broadest of all political constituencies but this court, it is, by design, as detached as possible from the body politic. That is why the court is supposed to stick to its business, to decide only cases and controversies, and to stay away from making this nation's policy about subjects like. Student one release and that means the court, on deciding this case, exercises authority it does not have. It violates the Constitution.”

Justice Kagan is 63 years old. She will, if the country is lucky, serve another 10 to 20 years on the Supreme Court. She will do so knowing she is not serving on the Supreme Court she grew up admiring, on the Supreme Court she no doubt dreamed of serving on when she was a law student. She is serving on the Supreme Court that she believes Violates the Constitution. That is as grave a crisis of faith as has ever been publicly voiced by a Supreme Court Justice.

Leading off our discussion about this is Jamelle Bouie (JB). He is a columnist for the New York Times and co-host of the podcast Unclear and Present Danger. Jamelle, thank you very much for joining us tonight. I have been wondering with whom I can share my crisis of faith here and you are my number one choice for this because I know you share many of the things that have led me to it. And it was you who first pointed out to me that my faith in a Supreme Court was literally in the one that existed during my lifetime. And that has actually turned out to be a relatively brief, let's call it 50 or so year kind of highpoint of the court as a facilitator of progress in the way we live, and in fact, it's not really the full history of the court at all.

JB: That's right, that the period of the court that I think a lot of people off familiar with and have affection for is the Warren Court. And the Warren Court didn't last for all that long 15 years, 16, 17 years, in a relatively short period in the history of the court. You can go back and get a little earlier to the Vinson court and look at some rulings there that lead up to key Warren court rulings like the Brown v. Board.

JB: By and large about 1/4 century tops of time that you can consider maybe even the high point of the Supreme Court when people understand that this defender of the rights of Americans this partner in trying to expand the rights of Americans to treacherous train to the worst parts at the time of our Constitutional status quo of things happening in our society.

JB: If you look back before that. Right into this earlier in the 20th century, it's early in the 19th century. What you see is a court that is consistently, consistently, consistently on the side of big business of corporations. Of uh, you know what I call local bullies, right? Segregationist people who are operating to try to restrain the freedoms of Americans. That court is either indifferent to that or actively abetting it. And that goes back into the 19th century. And so when you're looking at the court. In the present, in the last 25 or 30 years, I think what we're seeing is a court, especially right now, that is hearkening back to what the court has generally been, which is on the side of received power, of received influence, and of wealth.

So we have Senator Chris Murphy saying this Supreme Court six right-wing politicians masquerading as judges, gleefully imposing their politics on the country by fiat and unremorsefully living lives of leisure subsidized by billionaires with interest before the court an outrageous scam. And that's not something Chris Murphy was thinking 10 years ago, five years ago. This is a whole new level and I have to say on the corruption of the scholarship.

When the Alito opinion leaked overturning Roe versus Wade, I found in there two citations from 2 English lawyers and judges. From the Dark Ages, who were prosecutors of witches and who strongly advocated the death penalty for witches in England, which they helped effectuate and helped get witches put to death. And when I highlighted those pieces of the leaked opinion, I actually thought, well, that'll be deleted in the final opinion. Alito’s not gonna put out, and his clerks, they're not gonna put out the final opinion quoting the witch lawyers of England in their opinions about anything. They will be embarrassed by just the ridiculousness of that scholarship. But no, it's in there, both of those old English witch lawyers are in Alito's opinion overturning Roe v. Wade.

JB: We've seen this, I mean you mentioned that as well. We've seen this in this term, in the previous term, the court using reasoning, using scholarship that just doesn't hold muster. They're very clearly and simply working backward from a conclusion. That conclusion being what the conservatives on the court wanted to do. And I think it's time to recognize that that's sort of where we're going to be. That we're not necessarily going to see the strongest reasoning from this majority.

JB: We're not going to see rulings that are necessarily consistent with even that court's own reasoning in prior cases. We're going to see effectively a kind of will to power. I think it's gonna require opponents of this court to try to affect something similar in the places where they had confined influence as well.

Political Reality

As we depart from the swell of national pride inspired by our recent July 4th birthday celebration, it is time now to deal with the political reality of the present. Our founding fathers were visionaries but not flawless prognosticators. They relied on their then historical perspective where they were subjects of a monarchy and, in pursuit of independence, decided they wanted something else. They knew they didn’t want a king or any one individual who would be the ultimate decision-maker. Hence our Constitution, Bill of Rights, and other founding principles.

Today’s reality is one of personal greed wrapped in a cloak of Christian morality being used to create a period of gross inequality. Wealth equals political power in a way that was never intended. Our founding documents, much like the teachings of the Bible, are being twisted to conform to desired outcomes. Our laws and the interpretation of those laws no longer represent the will of the majority so much as it fulfills the needs of a few.

Let’s take gun violence, the right to bear arms, and the will of the majority of the people. The writers of the 2nd amendment never envisioned a time when the mentally ill would be able to purchase a firearm like an AR15, body armor, unlimited clips of ammunition, and walk into a school, synagogue, church, or crowd of July 4th celebrants and begin shooting at random for no apparent reason.

Whatever your thoughts on the rights of our citizens to bear arms, no right-thinking American would promote such a concept. In fact, virtually every poll taken in recent memory finds that the majority of Americans want some limits to be placed on gun accessibility.

If most Americans want limits and a better set of guidelines for gun access, why are our politicians tripping over themselves to pass legislation contrary to popular thoughts on the matter? Just ask Mitt Romney of Utah this question. I’m sure his answer would not be influenced by the fact that the National Rifle Association sent $13.6M in his direction.

The same could be said of the Senate’s “Dirty Dozen,” recipients of NRA cash donations who have collectively received almost $50M. Joining Romney in this auspicious group are Richard Burr (NC), Roy Blunt (MO), Thom Tillis (NC), Marco Rubio (FL), Joni Ernst (IA), Rob Portman (OH), Todd Young (IN), Bill Cassidy (LA), Tom Cotton (AR), Pat Toomey (PA), and capital track star Josh Hawley (MO). Gun manufacturing and its related industries are a multi-billion-dollar juggernaut that is more than willing to spend money to buy politicians to help promote that industry.

This brings us to abortion. Again, whatever your position on this controversial topic, it is highly doubtful that anyone would condone a law that forces a woman to suffer and perhaps die carrying a dead or non-viable infant to term. Other examples of such cruelty would be child victims of rape or incest, patients undergoing miscarriage compelled to bleed for days and risk sepsis because doctors can’t act, and ectopic pregnancies. Some in the anti-abortion camp perhaps see instances as just described as merely collateral damage in a religious war. They feel justified in their beliefs and want to enforce their will over the will of the majority.

Current polling holds that 61% of Americans want abortion legal in all or most cases. Only 37% say they want it illegal in all or most cases. Similar numbers have existed in all polls taken since 1995. White Protestant, Black Protestant, Catholic, and Unaffiliated polling overwhelmingly support abortion being allowed in all or most cases. The only exception to this would be evangelical White Protestants where 74% want it illegal. This last category represents only 14% of Americans.

So, the next question would be, why are Republicans falling on this religious sword when it would appear that it will hurt them in upcoming elections. I think this is an example of the dog finally catching the car. The relatively small group of evangelicals in the anti-abortion Christian conservative movement would reliably vote Republican while Roe v. Wade made the point moot for the rest of their constituents. Now, after Dobbs, and the haste with which the “Moral Minority” (falsely calling themselves the moral majority for years), advanced draconian legislation without thought or reflection, the backlash is upon them.

The 2024 elections will be a watershed for the Republican cause. It remains to be seen if this will damage them politically. Can they stuff the abortion genie back in the bottle or find enough other distractions to maintain their current majority? Time will tell.

The political reality of today is that any movement forward will be at a glacial pace. Speaking of glaciers, the Earth’s hottest day ever recorded was July 3, 2023. The average global temperature reached 62.62 degrees Fahrenheit. We’ve been recording such things with accuracy since the 1850s. If you have stepped outside in the last two months, you know it is hot. This morning I went out to get the morning paper and I saw a bird yanking a worm out of the ground with an oven mitt.

I won’t go further on climate change beyond saying that we need to make some changes but that won’t happen. If politicians couldn’t be moved to do anything about our gun laws after Sandy Hook beyond their tired “thoughts and prayers,” more complex problems like climate change will have to wait until they install a fan in the debt ceiling.

July 4, 2023

As we begin our traditional celebration of our nation’s birth, perhaps it would be a good time to reflect on why this day should always be one of proud celebration. It is more than hot dogs, hamburgers, watermelons, and fireworks. It is a time to remember the reasons why we celebrate our freedoms and independence. These freedoms were hard fought and require vigilance if they are to be protected.

We all are consumed by the politics of the day. To listen to the various sides of the argument you would think that the end was near and that this current adversity was of such significance that we could never survive. While I hold that the times are critical and our democracy is threatened, we have been here before. Imagine the fractures within our citizenry of the eighteenth century. There was a longing for the security of the motherland but also the temptations of independence.

This country has seen the founding period and the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, the Gilded Age, the Progressive Era, World War I, the New Deal, World War II, the Civil Rights Era, the Cold War, the Reagan Revolution, and whatever we end up calling this current debacle.

We have seen a recent erosion of our freedoms in the name of a religious resurgence tainted by obscene greed. Hopefully, we will again find a way through where our freedoms are protected, but not in some backhanded way. We should emerge better for having waged the fight by making a course correction that doesn’t sink the ship.

I, for one, have faith in our democracy. We need to find once again our shared national identity. As Americans, we are all brothers and sisters in a proud but dysfunctional family. Every person within our borders had ancestors who came from somewhere else. Even the indigenous peoples crossed a Landbridge to get here.

We are all but visitors living on a common landmass with a human need to not only survive but survive well. For those of you who believe in the Bible, perhaps it is time to reread that good book to find its true meaning and message once again. That would hold true for other religions as well. For those with no commitment to religion, you are hopefully guided by the human trait of compassion for others.

So, on this our nation’s birthday, perhaps it is time to reflect on our history, find common ground to salvage our democracy and understand that we are all Americans. All other labels are of lesser importance if they warrant any validity at all. The graphic accompanying this article shows a tattered flag. It would be disrespectful to fly such a flag. It should be taken down to make proper repairs. Our country and its founding democracy deserve the same treatment.

Benjamin Franklin: "Where liberty dwells, there is my country." 

Ten Rules in the Game of Life

Life is a game, and like all good games, it has rules. Upon observation and reflection, I have come up with the rules in the game of life as I see them today.

Rule 1: Capitalism and the acquisition of wealth are the most important aspects of life. All other rules must first comply with this rule. The Golden Rule which states, “He who has the gold gets to make the rules,” gets its validity here. To borrow a term from the science fiction series Star Trek, it is the “prime directive.” Greed is good. If there are any conflicts that arise from the interpretation of any other rules, see Rule 1.

Rule 2: An advanced education is the birthright of all wealthy individuals and access to that education shall be controlled by its cost and a patriarchal admissions process. The education of less important classes of individuals will be provided as necessary to ensure that the wealthy have the benefits of advancements in technology and medicine. There will be sufficient education in the trades and other occupations to meet the needs of the wealthy. There should be enough people forced through circumstances to remain under-educated to fulfill agricultural, factory, mining, and similar labor-intensive jobs that ultimately benefit the wealthy.

Rule 3: Religion will be promoted through interpretation in a manner that advances the goals of Rule 1. Religion will be a means of hiding the objectives of wealth acquisition to make those activities justifiable. Under the cloak of religion, all manner of things will be possible, not the least of which will be control and placation of the workers. Opium des Volkes is a dictum paraphrased from the writings of Karl Marx, the German sociologist and political economist who stated, “Religion is the opium of the people.”

Rule 4: Democracy will be an illusion where the outcome of all elections will be in satisfaction of Rule 1. Through gerrymandering, voter suppression, media control, political prosecution, court appointments, and manipulation of the overall voting process, election outcomes will be predetermined. Authoritarian rule will be disguised as being the will of the people, but its true purpose will be to advance totalitarianism.

Rule 5: Taxes will be collected disproportionately from the lower classes. The wealthy will pay few or no taxes while the tax burden will be borne by those who cannot afford the legal expertise to decipher the tax code to their benefit. Regressive taxes will be used wherever possible, and loopholes will be provided to allow the wealthy to advance their station in life. With the proper implementation of this rule, the rich get richer and the poor stay poor.

Rule 6: Laws will be enforced on all but the wealthy. The illusion that everyone is equal under the law will be maintained so that, even though the wealthy may suffer the indignation of prosecution for law violations, they will have an unbalanced set of protections that will result in very few convictions. By that measure, a person found guilty of the theft of one hundred dollars may be jailed and his future employment prospects crushed, and a person found guilty of the theft of millions of dollars can get probation, pay a small fine, and have his record of conviction erased.

Rule 7: Climate change, environmental conservation, and similar issues that will probably not affect you during your lifetime are of little importance. Your ability to make any significant impact is probably minimal and will violate the principles of Rule 1. You need to kick that can down the road and let future generations spend their time and money worrying about such problems.

Rule 8: Medical decisions made by medical professionals are of less importance than medical decisions made by politicians. Politicians are always in a better position to candidly weigh the financial consequences of medical decisions. If outlawing a medical procedure, especially one for the poor, can save money in Medicare, Medicaid, or insurance coverage, it is usually a good thing. If you can hide this motivation under the guise of religious conviction, you get a twofer. You save money for the wealthy and you get the religious right to back you in the election process. Using abortion as an example, the procedure is still available to those who can afford to travel but is no longer available to those with inadequate financial means. A real win-win.

Rule 9: Upward mobility will be provided as motivation for the lower classes to keep them slogging through life and providing services. This ability to move above their current station will have lottery-winning-like odds. In fact, one of those mobility avenues will be the lottery. A select few might also hit the upward mobility lottery through professional sports or entertainment careers. Most will not know how to manage their new-found wealth and they will be easy suckers for crafty entrepreneurs.

Rule 10: Hate and anger are strong motivators and keep the proletariat too busy to realize that they are being exploited. Racism, faux nationalism, patriotic fervor, xenophobia, homophobia, and religious discrimination are excellent distractors. Creating us versus them scenarios will allow them to feel that they are part of something much larger. As any good magician will tell you, if they are looking at the exciting flash, they will miss what’s going on in the shadows.

In conclusion, if you find that the life rules above align with your motives and objectives, then you should continue to vote for the political party that espouses these same ideals. If, however, you find these rules to be cynical and lacking in common decency, you should do your homework and be highly selective in your political choices while you still can make such a choice. Otherwise, it won’t be long before you find that the plight of the Russian, Venezuelan, Cuban, North Korean, and Syrian peoples will be your own. 

The Age of Trump

Like it or not we live in an age defined by a sociopath. In a perfect storm and confluence of events, a man of abhorrent personal qualities caused enough people to overlook the obvious and allow him to seize the reins of the most powerful nation in the world. We had for too long tolerated the greed and abuses of our political elite, so we allowed an unproven neophyte who promised to be a breath of fresh air to ascend to power. To quote John Cleese of Monty Python’s Flying Circus, “…and now for something completely different.”

No politician in American history could have previously survived the litany of gaffs, missteps, and outright assaults on acceptable behavior perpetrated by The People’s Fool. For him to rise within the ranks of the Republican Party, known for its patriotic fervor, religious piety, and conservative ideology, is a testament to the strangeness of the times. To think that a draft dodger could denigrate a war hero because “"He’s not a war hero. He’s a war hero because he was captured. I like people that weren’t captured." Trump denies that he ever said such a thing but the video shot in Ames, Iowa, on July 18, 2015, has him saying just that. As of the beginning of 2021, the Trump lie tracking machine counter at the Washington Post was at 30,573.

Lesser politicians would have crashed and burned after that one gaff but not our blonde sociopath. Then there was the infamous “Access Hollywood” tape that Trump was able to shrug off as locker room talk. For politicians of previous generations his proclamation that it was his male birthright as a wealthy famous person to treat women as sexual objects placed here for his amusement would have been the coup de grâce. Did Trump crash and burn after that one? Nope. How is this possible?

Then there was the time that President Donald Trump discussed classified information during an Oval Office meeting on May 10, 2017, with the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and the Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. The classified info concerned a planned Islamic State operation that easily burned the identity of an Israeli agent and revealed intelligence collection methods. The Israeli Mossad then issued an advisory that warned about sharing intelligence with the Trump White House because of the cavalier attitude of that administration toward national secrets and intelligence. Trump had his staff first deny that anything had happened but, when faced with facts, Trump bragged that he had every right to disclose national secrets to his Russian friends. Did Trump’s ratings take a hit? Nope.

Now we have the preoccupation with “his classified documents.” Like a child with a favorite stuffed animal, the former president threw a presidential tantrum at the thought of being separated from his toys. He treated our nation’s secrets like Linus treated his blanket. They were his personal treasures. The mere possession of such valuable stuff stroked his ego. He would travel the country with his favorite boxes. His staff began referring to them as his “beautiful mind” materials. The reference was to the book/movie about John F. Nash, Jr. whose schizophrenic mind believed news clippings contained a secret Russian cipher that he needed to crack.

Trump and his obsession with this collection of boxes has also been compared to the Gollum character in The Hobbit/Lord of the Rings, who called The Ring, “my precious.” The Ring in this case was magical in that it grants the wearer invisibility. I doubt that Trump would ever envy invisibility unless it meant it could be used to hide from his legal troubles.

In the fictional middle earth that was the world of Gollum, his obsession with The Ring was the cause of his destruction. It remains to be seen if Trump’s obsession with control of “his boxes” will have a similar effect. As they say, “It ain’t over till the fat lady sings.” This is of course a reference to Wagner’s opera cycle Der Ring des Nibelungen and Valkyrie Brünnhilde (a buxom character) whose final twenty-minute operatic moment signals the end of the world for the Norse gods. In Trump’s case, the fat lady is still doing vocal warm-ups. Trump may in fact be his own "fat lady" as he does like to sing about his activities, even those that dig the hole of his political grave even deeper.

Another analogy was made in an opinion piece in the New York Times by Maureen Dowd where she likened Trump’s attitude to that of King Louis XIV of France who famously stated, L’État, c’est moi. The translation is “I am the state” and was used to describe the king’s exercise of control over all things. It represents the manifestation of power in a dictatorial and repressive manner. Perhaps such thoughts echo within the cranial recesses of our nation’s first true sociopathic ruler. His “beautiful mind” Is beyond the understanding of mere mortals, at least those of us who live on planet Earth and not the tangential universe of planet Trump.

In that same opinion piece by Maureen Dowd, she references the time when Trump’s office in Trump Tower had walls covered with magazine covers so that his own face “stared back at him from every angle like an infinity mirror.” She stated that he must worry: "Without pieces of paper to prove I am important, am I important?"

Donald Trump is but a tick feasting on the blood of an unwitting segment of our society. A veritable smorgasbord of religious extremists, racists, xenophobes, homophobes, etc., became his very own Happy Meal. He has found his ultimate con in politics. As a perpetual candidate, he has tapped into the forgotten motherlode of America’s citizenry. Like a border collie, he herds his sheep with loud barking. He hopes they won’t see through his disguise and realize that he is not the friendly canine who will guide them to a greater America but a wolf in disguise who will have them for lunch, and not in a good way. His sheep are blinded by promises and a false kindred spirit that is the stock in trade of the good conman.

Politicians would normally ignore or disavow racists, white supremacists, Nazis, homophobes, xenophobes, anti-Semites, and the radical religious fringe, even if they too held some measure of similar beliefs. In a normal world filled with normal sane and caring people, these radicals would be a political third rail. For Trump, they represented an untapped resource that would electrify his campaign, and by openly acknowledging support for them, they found a champion for their belief systems. As isolated camps they were ineffectual, but as a collective, they could work as a voting block that would be difficult to ignore. The mob mentality of January 6th was festering.

Current traditional conservative Republican politicians cower in fear of Trump’s cult of human flotsam. He demands that Republicans pay homage to their de facto new leader and, if found wanting, they will suffer the ire of the cult and could even earn a derisive new name. In addition to the cult members, in the 2016 elections, he found enough support among independents and traditional Republicans who were unaware of his true nature to win the presidency. After four years in office, the 2020 election saw that many independents and even some traditional Republicans went in a new direction. The Cult of Trump was not enough to swing a second presidency. I doubt that he will succeed in 2024. He will campaign if only to fill his coffers with donations.

The Donald will always be the Donald. He will not change. His sociopathy is a means for his survival. He suffers no shame, remorse, or boundaries. His disordered mind is like his many file boxes, a collection of “things” he desires for his self-aggrandizement. Unlike Citizen Kane who had Rosebud as a singular joyful memory from his youth, Citizen Trump has no such pleasant memory from his early days, only his magazine covers, his plaques, his trophies (aka former wives, prostitutes, porn stars, and rape victims), his headlines, his video of January 6th, and yes, his boxes.

Trump's Secrets in Hangar 51 Storage

You can almost bet that there are still some classified records somewhere within his span of control. I can imagine him dreaming of the final scene from Raiders of the Lost Ark where the Ark is hidden in Hangar 51, the government storage facility for important artifacts of supernatural and extraterrestrial importance. Perhaps, in Trump's Hangar 51, there is even a love letter from Kim or a thong once worn by Vladimir.

What, Me Worry?

Climate change is proving its existence with record heat, fires, drought, famine, and bizarre storm events. Ukrainians are fighting for their freedom from their neighbor aggressor, Russia, and its authoritarian leader, Putin. The gay community both here and abroad is under attack. Religious fanatics and their political stooges have been able to impose their will and have managed to impinge on a woman’s right to manage her own health needs. A housing crisis looms as more citizens are forced to join the unhoused. Domestic education is being attacked by those who attempt to push their own political and social agendas and push a revisionist interpretation of history on pliable youthful minds. To accomplish this and turn a profit besides, public education is being phased out in deference to a for-profit education system.

Fire, Drought, and Fighting in Ukraine are all in the news.

But, who is in the headlines?

With all the above looming large, what is dominating the news? Donald Trump and his “trials” and tribulations. Yes, Donald Trump, is forever the victim of a Jewish conspiracy run by George Soros and the liberal flying monkeys attempting to destroy him. He continues to play the victim card and enough of his minions are willing to part with their money in a bizarre turn of fortunes. I say bizarre as he is the “billionaire” who, when he first ran for office, was going to pay for everything in his campaign. But now he continually asks for donations from the less fortunate. The perpetual campaign is his latest lucrative con. Trump’s role as Robin Hood has taken a turn as he sucks money from the poor like a cash-greedy Roomba. He’s more like Robin Hoodlum.

After his recent surrender in a Federal courthouse in Miami, Trump’s motorcade stopped at a popular Cuban eatery, Versailles. In a grandiose gesture, he yelled, “Food for everyone.” Anyone would have assumed he was offering to buy lunch for the crowd. Anyone who knows Donald Trump would know better; The Donald doesn’t pay for anything unless he is forced and has lost all his appeals. True to his character, Trump did not pick up the tab for anything that day.

Speaking of hoodlums, The Donald’s troubles certainly can’t be that he is following the partly successful gameplan of his doppelganger, John Joseph Gotti Jr. So far, this “Teflon Don” has managed to maintain most of his non-stick coating. However, just like the Dupont product, if the heat rises too high, the coatings break down, toxic chemicals are released into the air, people in close proximity suffer, and things begin to stick. His recent losses in court may be a sign that the temperature is rising. Forget global warming, Chef Karma is in the kitchen.

Time will tell if this Teflon Don can take the heat. His brother in spirit ended up being betrayed by an underboss, Sammy the Bull Gravano, and was eventually sentenced to life in prison. In John Gotti’s case, it was five murders, conspiracy to commit murder, racketeering, obstruction of justice, tax evasion, illegal gambling, extortion, and loansharking that brought him down. He took the Cosa Nostra with him. As far as we know, Trump isn’t being investigated for murder. However, he does tick many of the same Gotti boxes.

Currently, his legal team is like a rugby scrum where everyone is pushing in different directions. In rugby, the front row of each team is comprised of two “props” and a “hooker.” It wouldn’t be a good Trump analogy without a hooker. The teams vie for possession of the ball after it is thrown in the gap between the two front rows. The hookers and props then try to move the ball to the back of the scrum with their feet while the entire pack of players attempts to push the opposing pack backward. Trump’s legal team is not this organized so there ends the analogy.

This is an actual rugby scrum, it could also be a group photo of 
Trump's legal team hard at work.

The crime boss comparison seems appropriate here as John Gotti seemed to be immune from criminal prosecution, not because he was innocent but because he managed to corrupt the justice system. Legal delays, bribery, witness intimidation, and jury tampering were all used to reap three not-guilty verdicts thus earning him the Teflon Don title. Donald J. Trump has also managed to tie up the legal system like a Gordian knot. But this is "Donald the Trump," not "Alexander the Great." We don’t know yet if he will have his own Sammy the Bull betray him or if it will only be a collection of lawyers and underlings who are backed into legal corners not willing to follow Michael Cohen’s example by going to jail.

While it will be of some interest to see how this all plays out, the fact remains that Donald Trump is still sucking all the oxygen out of the room. He is like a car wreck that you can’t look away from. He is like the clickbait that lingers in the margins of the web page you are reading that wants your eyeballs elsewhere and teases you with the opening line, “Alien baby found at fire station has three…” How otherwise sane individuals of modest means can be attracted to a wealthy conman who speaks about making their lives great escapes me. I guess televangelists have been doing it for years. Donald Trump doesn’t care about anyone unless they can do something for him. The moment that person is branded as unnecessary or disloyal they are ridiculed. Donald Trump is so kind and compassionate that, if he passed by an orphanage on fire, he would be the one looking for a bag of marshmallows and a long fork.

It's Duh-Santis If You Please

Casey DeSantis, wife of our Florida governor, would like to have the pronunciation of their last name changed. It seems she would prefer “Duh” Santis versus “Dee” Santis. This would be a wise change as it would match the current pronunciation of our state in many arenas when it is referenced as, “Floriduh.” This descriptor is derogatory in nature as it infers a certain lack of intellect. If that is her intent, I applaud the change.

Florida has been without a governor since before her husband’s reelection. We apparently elected “candidate” DeSantis and not a governor. His only “governing” in the state has been to keep his name in the spotlight of challengers to the de facto Republican presidential nominee, whatshisname. Florida apparently has no housing problem, or transportation problem, or insurance problem, or coastal flooding problem, or gun violence problem, or school safety problem. Florida’s top problems are drag shows, unsupportive theme parks, immigrants in Texas, and woke school books.

In April I visited the Lake Nona Region of Florida. This 17 square mile area south of Orlando is self-described as, “…a trendy planned community made up of sleek family homes, bungalows, and leafy gated communities. Lake Nona is one of the fastest-growing communities in America. Lake Nona is home to thoughtfully-designed neighborhoods, dozens of parks and playgrounds, weekly community events, top-rated education facilities, walkable shopping, dining, and entertainment options, and innovative business clusters.” I stayed in a newly completed hotel in a neighborhood surrounded by upscale homes and new businesses.

Lake Nona Pedestrian Walkway

The Lake Nona Region was however cast on the heap of collateral damage wrought by Florida’s governor and his War on Woke. In this case, despite the ironic fact that Ron and Princess Casey were married in the Magic Kingdom, Disney refused to join DeSantis’ attacks on the gay community. In fact, they actively denounced the governor’s plan. The thin-skinned governor then plotted his revenge by taking away their special tax status (enjoyed by hundreds of other businesses throughout the state) and replaced the district’s governing board with his own cronies in a specially convened legislative session. The Fuhrer of Florida would not tolerate dissent in his Magic Kingdom.

MoeRon and Casey Get Married at Disney
(Ariel was the maid of honor and Goofy was the best man)

As a result of his childish actions, DeSantis saw that Disney would reward him by pulling about $1B of investments and 2,000 high-paying jobs out of Florida. The Lake Nona Region will pay for much of this as it will see other investors, who had counted on the Disney cash investments to make their own business ventures viable, follow Disney and consider other alternatives. Lake Nona is a beautiful area and there has been far too much already built to allow its demise. It will, however, not see the explosive growth that would have undoubtedly followed the Disney expansion had not the governor thrown a temper tantrum like a sleep-deprived three-year-old desperately in need of a nap.