Every evening I look forward to reading your Letters from an American. Every evening my hair stands on end for a longer and longer time. I cannot conceive the depths the previous administration sank to, and yet, I learn each day the depths are deeper and deeper. Are we looking at the Mariana Trench of official crime and corruption in the Executive Branch of the government of the United States of America? I am stunned that most Republicans believe the former guy and support him unequivocally. I simply do not understand the staying power of that man nor the cultish devotion he receives. I try to read a few articles and interviews of people who are respected for their intellectual abilities to describe their views without inflammatory rhetoric. I cannot finish reading any of the “right of center” without being completely offended by assertions that believers in progressive policies are haters of America (true! Interview in this weekend’s Wall Street Journal) and all progressives want is the destruction of the Great American Experiment! Really! I want to destroy the country I love? I was so offended by that statement I steamed for quite a while!
I intended to write a grateful thank you to Heather Cox Richardson for the work and research she does to produce her Letters from an American. I hope she sees my gratitude first and my rant as a pent up release to a soul who may accept a kindred soul’s despair. I am very afraid.
Heather herself firmly repeats that she is in it for the long haul and has faith in the American people to assert our will--listen to her video chats on Facebook and YouTube, if you haven't already.
American historian HCR + optimistic lawyer political analyst Robert Hubbell is a good recipe for keeping the faith and getting direction on concrete action for democracy. As Robert writes:
"Since the early days of this newsletter, I have urged my family (and readers) to maintain perspective by taking a long-term view. If we focus on the last four hours, it is easy to work ourselves into a frenzy. But if we measure our progress over the long term, we increase the likelihood that we will remain in the fight until we achieve ultimate victory."
Long term optimism/short term pessimism has demonstrated its value countless times in the past. We can expect things to get worse in the near term but need to work for a victory that will be longer in coming.
I don't know about that. David Leonhardt's "the morning" this morning raises frightening questions about the survival of our Democracy. The Democrats are really going to have to come together to counter this stuff, at a grass roots level unless all the voting rights legislation gets passed. Here's Leonhardt:
Jim, You have appeared to be a strong critic of the Washington Post and the New York Times, the two leading newspapers in the country. They have faults, weaknesses and in the case of the NY Times several of the paper's judgements have been damaging. Withal, I respect both papers and they have been along with others our sources of facts and provided solid guidance in many areas of our lives. Beyond that, I am a fervent supporter of the Free Press. Your attacks have seemed lacking in substance and almost automatically generated. It may be harsh. I welcome your response. A portion of my comment yesterday has been added to this one. Peace.
'HCR's historical foundation, keen mind and lucid prose are supported by the work of the journalists in the USA and around the world. It is the journalists who are responsible for bringing us as close as possible to the truth of what is happening in our country and elsewhere. Journalists matter. If you look through today's letter with an eye to how many times journalists are referred to as the source of information and if you closely look at the list of the Letter' sources under the 'Note", you will 'note' who Heather Cox Richard's and subscribers to LFAA are depending upon. We cannot dismiss or overlook the role of journalists in keeping democracy alive.'
'Why Is Freedom Of The Press Important in a Democracy?'
'Freedom of the press states that expression and communication through published media – like in print and video – is a right. Freedom of the press is codified in multiple documents that set international standards. A government should not interfere with this freedom or censor media that’s critical of state power. For years, freedom of the press has been an essential part of democracy. In a democracy, people have the right to choose their government either directly or by electing representatives. Why is freedom of the press so important for democracy to thrive? What are the threats to this freedom?'
'Truth, accountability, and informed voting: reasons why freedom of the press matters
A healthy democracy has guiding principles like citizen rule, fair and free elections, the protection of individual rights, and cooperation. To ensure these principles become a reality, a free press is important. There are three main reasons why:'
'A free press fights for the truth'
'Freedom of the press matters because a free press uncovers the truth. There are many issues – often very complicated ones – that journalists are trained to analyze and explain. Without newspapers, radio shows, blogs, etc, the average person would have little to no knowledge of what’s going on around them. Most people lack the time and resources to investigate issues and stories that affect them and their communities. That’s where journalists come in. Armed with skills like research and critical thinking, the best journalists know what questions to ask, what leads to pursue, and how to fact-check. Fact-checking is a vital element of a free press. If the press is not able to fact-check safely and effectively, the truth remains buried.'
'A free press holds power accountable'
'Many entities can benefit from the truth staying hidden, including governments. One of the free press’ main missions is serving as a watchdog on power. The press is the bridge between the people and powerful entities. If the press is not free but instead beholden to power, it simply serves as an extension of that power. Without freedom of the press, journalists who try to tell the truth when it threatens the state are not protected by the law. This makes censorship and suppression inevitable. Even if a state made it a goal to be more truthful and transparent, there’s always an agenda they would need to serve. In the case of corruption and human rights violations, a free press is essential to exposing abuses of power.'
'A free press informs voters and strengthens democracy'
'Informed voting is the third reason why freedom of the press is so important. Democracies only thrive when voters are as informed as possible. Being informed ensures people understand the issues at hand and what policies and politicians best represent them. The press is the body that informs by analyzing information, encouraging discussion, and fact-checking. The freer the press, the better informed voters can be. Without this freedom, voters would be at the mercy of politicians and special interest groups that want to win elections and promote specific legislation. It would be very difficult and time-consuming for voters to do all their work on their own. A strong media makes the process less complicated and offers valuable insight.' (HumanRightsCareers) See link below.
For the immigration history that the NYT, NPR, etc, seem unaware of, I highly recommend the new book, Back of the Hiring Line: A 200-year history of immigration surges, employer bias, and depression of Black wealth, by Roy Beck. It is very well researched, with academic economic history, multiple gov't commissions on immigration reform, all of which recommended reducing immigration, statements of Black leaders beginning w/ Frederick Douglass, and Black periodicals. Beck repeatedly tells readers not to blame immigrants, who also currently suffer from too much immigration; that Congress is to blame for legislating mass immigration despite the findings of the gov't commissions. $9 on Amazon.
I appreciate this link. I went to his newsletter and really liked what I saw - as well as the fact that he seems to follow up with subscribers' comments! So, now I'm officially a subscriber, thanks to you!
Thank you, Ellie, for that cold splash in the face! I can get wound up and rant angrily or despairingly to the point that my husband tells me it’s time to go on a complete news fast. There are times when I do just that. Since the pandemic, I, like most of the rest of the world, limit my personal interactions so that I have also limited my availability to hear other points of view, admittedly from friends who are mostly progressives, but still have divergent senses of the near-term fate of our country. Even my otherwise staid husband will put his uber-cynical hat on and turn the air blue.
So, to have you say we are not all going to fall into a bottomless pit of authoritarianism is helpful indeed! Again, thank you very much!
I have no crystal ball, but optimism fuels creative resistance to authoritarianism. At the end of Heather’s interview yesterday of Rebecca Solnit, Rebecca described a lovely image that change is inevitable and we are the river, while trumpers are a dam that will be overrun. Rebecca also talked about needing both bread and roses, i.e. life balance, and being more than one to effect social change. So yes, take care of yourself! We take turns rejuvenating.
You read my mind. BTW the WSJ is now Rupert’s rag, just Fox in print. When I read that he had bought it (years ago), my heart sank. It’s his pretense of being a newspaper man, His New York Post is just another Enquirer. That Chris Wallace lent his journalism chops to Fox made my heart sink as well. Fox was anything but Fair and Balanced from day one. The big lie started there. Thank God there are diggers of truth, hopefully to reveal a mountain of treason, sedition, and lies to rival Hitler’s big lie and Goebbels 5 main propaganda rules (got banned from Twitter for posting them as Repub strategy). All this to be front and center in 2022.
Okay, so I posted the Hitler/Goebbels 5 main propoganda rules, intending to add a message suggesting comparison to t-Rump, but facebook deleted the post and banned me from making political posts for 30 days, too! I tried to object but "in these pandemic times" they claim to not have the staff to review it. But my t-Rumper relatives can post political LIES and LIBEL, and sail right through the censor algorithym.
My anti-chump posts must have made their algorithm go bananas. FB can bite it, especially since their data breach a while back dumped my info on the dark web. I still get spam calls and had to change passwords, etc. a real bummer…
1. If you tell a lie big enough, and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it
2. Accuse the other side of that which you are guilty.
3. Propaganda works best when those who are being manipulated are confident that they are acting on their own free will.
4. It (is) vitally important for the State...to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus the greatest enemy of the State.
-Joseph Goebbels, Reich Minister for "Public Enlightenment" in Nazi Germany
Tis this that I said described republican verbiage in November 2020. Twitter said it violated "community standards." It describes their verbiage even more now. I first noticed No. 2 when Karl Rove was foisting W on Texas. I think Nixon used it first.
Somehow Karl Rove escaped the deserved consequence of Treason for his public outing of former CIA Intelligence Agency officer Valerie Plame because Rove wanted to destroy her career for her contradicting the republican WH rationale for going to war with Iraq.
He has continued to be a slimy Fox arse, surprised that he didn’t wind up in chump’s WH. Jail would have done it for me. And I thought W/Dickie was as low as they could go. Silly me…
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, ...
... for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."
The media and all his little lockstep asskissers repeating, repeating, repeating the big lie...it even got me wondering if there may be a kernel of truth to it? Then, it's like no, don't believe it, then it's like no, don't believe anything! Which I know, is another tenant of authoritarianism!
We NEED another iteration of the Fairness doctrine. Most folks I talk to have never heard of it, so, I take up oxygen.
Another tenet of Goebbels (not with this that I put on Twitter) is that the Big Lie is more believable if it has a kernel of truth to make the lie more plausible. May have been in the James Murphy translation of Mein Kampf that I read an excerpt from. describes how "purposeful lying can be used as effective propaganda." I'm sure Rupert has read it.
Thanks for this posting. I was going to post it but here you have done it. Both Goebbels and Hitler had propaganda principles far greater than "five" and far more sophisticated. More, merely than "the bigger the lie the better it is believed." https://www.physics.smu.edu/pseudo/Propaganda/goebbels.html
In early March 2020, Congress held public hearings about the Jan 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. Unlike other services, the Defense Department sent a career official who was not a main operational decision-makers at the Pentagon on that day.
Testifying for the DC National Guard, was Commander William Walker, whose late January statements to The Washington Post, had spurred the hearings. Walker spoke about changes Trump appointed officials had made to the chain of command leading up to Jan 6 and the unusual strictures on the DC Guard that day.
Not only was the DC Commander now required to get written directives for deployment from two command streams - the leaders of which were jockeying for priority and one of whom had gone missing in action - he was barred from having his troops ready for deployment. The Trump administration had even hobbled the small rapid response team designed to protect troops on duty - who'd they denied personal protective and defensive equipment.
In an operation which itself was logistically fraught, Walker side stepped Executive branch and Pentagon obstruction to readiness, by secretly having troops gear up and then hiding them while awaiting permission to deploy. Had Walker not taken this personal responsibility, the DC Guard would have been delayed hours more than the 4-5 hours delay imposed by the Pentagon - when every second counted.
Part of the Republican campaign to present the sacking of the Capitol as a kerfuffle, is their demand to know how many armed protestors were apprehended and how many guns confiscated. This is disingenuous. The Trump administration had incited raucous protests to become a violent riot and then allowed the riot to become an insurrection. By the time the National Guard was allowed on the grounds, defense of the Capitol was no longer possible and the mission was to safely clear the Capitol. No measures had been taken nor were there sufficient numbers of troops to make and process arrests. As a result, armed rioters, who can be seen in tactical gear and with weapons on videos, were able to slip away.
Part of the delay to adjudicating the insurrection is caused by having to access and analyze many thousands of hours of video, track down individuals, and then make the evidence available to lawyers who must do their own analysis and interpretations. In the context of participants who not only had tactical gear but tactical training in covert operations - you didn't think the armed militias Republicans have been playing footsie with all these decades were just play acting did you? Not after other armed attacks on government property by such as the Bundy's? They've been revved up for revolution by Republican right wing extremists and they've been rehearsing. Rhetoric has intent and has consequences.
The events and evidence already available for public review clearly prove the intent and guilt of a number of individuals to interfere with the peaceful and legitimate transfer of power to a new administration legitimately elected in a free and fair election. It must be clear these are serious federal crimes and all of those involved should be held accountable and punished accordingly. That accountability and punishment is the responsibility of the Department of Justice and our court system. We also should expect Congress to fulfill its legitimate and legal role of both oversight of the Executive branch and legislate accordingly to prevent and punish any reoccurrence. Congress must assure the American public has the full and real story of what happened and pass its findings on to DOJ with appropriate criminal referrals wherever appropriate. It matters not the office or position of any miscreants involved in criminal behavior, all those involved must be held accountable.
From LFAA: "The report from the January 6 Committee also notes that Meadows apparently used an encrypted phone and that he communicated frequently with members of Congress about challenging the election."
Don't you wonder who those "members of Congress" are? Would that be what Meadows is attempting to prevent Verizon from releasing?
We already know from reports by Rolling Stone and the Hill of a number of the usual suspects who participated in both planning and organizing for the 6th riots. You can read of the reported names here:
Thank you for the link. From that article: "The two sources for the Rolling Stone piece said the members who either participated in the work or sent top staffers included GOP Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.), Paul Gosar (Ariz.), Lauren Boebert (Colo.), Mo Brooks (Ala.), Madison Cawthorn (N.C.), Andy Biggs (Ariz.) and Louie Gohmert (Texas.)."
I would be guessing, but I would also put into the hopper a few more names: Cruz, Hawley, Kennedy, McCarthy, Gaetz, Jordan, Nunes, Scalise, Johnson...and probably more. If they are checking the phone records of the entire Sedition Caucus, no wonder this is taking so long.
I have written to several members of the House Select Committee and AG Merrick Garland requesting the criminal referrals and the appointment of a special counsel to address all of those referrals. The appointment of a special counsel will achieve protection of the investigation and prosecution from political interference in both the investigation and any relevant prosecutions regardless of any changes in Congress or the Executive branch.
"The events and evidence already available for public review clearly prove the intent and guilt of a number of individuals.."
Whew. Eek. Not so fast. What looks like evidence, clear proof, intent, and guilt to 'common sense' is entirely inadmissible to adjudication of the law and contrary to due process.
Even juries must be instructed on the law before rendering their decision of the facts of a case.
I agree completely with the legal process and standards of our justice system. However, I stand by exactly the phrasing of my comments. Were I delivering the opening statement of a trial to hold those responsible accountable, I would use these words as written in my remarks to the jury, and the presiding judge would permit them as written. It is important in prosecution of these crimes to show and prove “beyond a reasonable doubt” that the crimes were committed by the defendant and that the accused was aware of the criminality of their actions and had intent to commit the crimes. I believe firmly that evidentiary standard is met by the publicly available information. It is not my role to declare guilt as I am not a member of a jury to judge the guilt or innocence of those accused. However, I am a citizen impacted adversely by their actions and fully entitled to request our judicial system to investigate and if warranted prosecute them.
Hello Lin, What is the basis for this statement: "What looks like evidence, clear proof, intent, and guilt to 'common sense' is entirely inadmissible to adjudication of the law and contrary to due process." You have brilliantly laid out the wrong doing and treasonous obstruction in your first post, but suddenly back away from the idea that any of this is subject to prosecution and justice. So what are we to do - write the history of this insurrection, but sit back and sigh because there was nothing we could do about it? The insurrection couldn't be more clear - it's almost getting boring reading about it - are there no laws in your mind that have been broken? And is there no legal redress? And anyway, why are we counting angels dancing on the head of a judicial pin when the traitorous insurrection is continuing and we are on a fast track to dictatorship? Are you saying we should follow the letter of the law to its tiniest vanishing point while they are shouldering their AK 47s and readying their liberal concentration camps?
Whew. Oops. I only meant to say, what you or I might mean by "evidence, clear proof, intent, and guilt" in the public square or private conversation is not the same as the meanings of these words in a court of law.
This is one reason the disingenuous and dodgy 'textualism' perpetrated by conservative jurists is a con job. Dictionaries do not fix the meanings of words for all time or even for one time. Dictionaries, selectively, trace the trajectories of words through social space. Courts are a very formal and specific social space. Law has its own dictionaries. Its vocabulary and meanings are not necessarily on the tip of our tongues or in our texts.
I listen to oral arguments on the radio. I also once spent a few days in court. It became clear to me that not only the meanings of the words, but the protocols governing their use are very specific in that context. They determine what is evidence and what sort it is. And even how it can be admitted and considered.
For instance, proof in any event (except perhaps mathematics) is rarely clear and almost always the result of coming to consensus by rules of order. And that process is very different in court than on the street corner.
We agree that words have power and are differently relevant in differing contexts. I am calling to question your bold and strongly worded statement "is entirely inadmissible to adjudication of the law and contrary to due process." Strong words!! It sounds like you are saying our common sense interpretation of treasonous acts will not have any relevance in the legal system. Your comments are often illuminating, but my question was a genuine one - is there reason to think our legal system will not be able to hold these treasonable acts accountable? If so, I'd like some specifics as to why this is so. We are all terrified Trump et al will get away with it. So a serious discussion about what can be used in court would be welcome. I'm sure they are having these kinds of discussions at the highest levels of the DOJ even as we speak.
Yes, I think our common usage of the words evidence, proof, guilt etc does not apply to court proceedings. The 'court of public opinion' cannot, thankfully, adjudicate the law.
Our legal system was designed to hold law breakers to account. I think that despite Republican Party and Federalist Society predations, our lower Federal courts seem to be serving justice, as instituted by the Constitution and defined by legal precedent.
The Supreme Court is a wild card.
Conservatives have put their cards on the table.
The Constitution only means what they divine 'original intent' to be. And while they may nod to specific legislation as 'established law' they have no respect for established laws they don't like. Kavanaugh recently played his hand by asserting a Supreme Court obligation to overturn 'bad law' seemingly unrelated to whether litigants have standing or the facts presented. Eek.
So yes, we have the apparatus to hold Jan 6 miscreants to account . But ultimately it is in the hands of their 'co conspirators'. I use that term loosely, but would very much like to know how conservative activists Ginni and Clarence Thomas may or may not appear in the record.
Hi Ned, While very interested is social issues and legal applications, lin may be able to suggest a few sources for you but not have the expertise you are looking for. Unfortunately, I am very rushed. I probably have not located the best sources for you, but see if any of those below are of interest.
Lin, as you know the burden for criminal conviction is beyond a reasonable doubt. However juries are allowed to apply their common sense and perhaps many of the things you think are inadmissible may include evidence that is admissible. A back and forth on this evidence would require you to tell me what you think is inadmissible. That is an exercise which would require a good deal of discussion and probably beyond what would be reasonable to discuss herein.
And the clandestine infiltration of trump minions into the riots in Portland who employed the most destruction/violence. All this was to be used by trump as justification for initiating his sought-after police-state punishment for those states/people who criticized/opposed him.
That event, for me, is etched on my brain as tremendously significant in showing how Trump and others were guilty of inaction—not standing up to this very disturbing revelation, not saying to our country that this type of behavior will not be tolerated. In fact, they tolerated it just fine. A sad moment for our country when leaders condone violence towards elected officials they don't like.
Hi Grace, yes I agree. I was referring to specific instances where he "acted by being inactive," like the Whitmer incident, or when he sat and watched the TV for hours during Jan. 6th rather than getting on the podium and denouncing what was happening.
Well, that's the least he could do. Earlier on he'd said, "And I'll be with you." He must have meant "watching on TV". "In the spirit" might have been a bit too abstruse.
Thank you for this. So much to this that is in little pieces here and there. I hadn't heard that part about Walker seeing up a secret group to sidestep the Trump barriers. Wow. He should get a medal.
I haven’t noticed you before, Lin. If you are willing, please share a little more of your background because you are so convincing and persuasive that whether to trust you is an important issue for me. I use my full name, so you can easily find me if you’d prefer to do it directly. Thank you.
Thank You Deborah. I will try to link my sources more.
I am a CSpan Junkie. That is my primary source. Along with Washington Post , NYTimes, The New Yorker and my local paper. For my sins, I dip into Murdoch et al rags sometimes. I do not have television or wifi and do not participate in social media - other than this comments section. I've learned a lot from book reviews.
I am not an academic or journalist, but have had access to original sources and also done research for publications in peer reviewed journals.
I write Letters to the Editors, and sometimes people have tracked me down. Always positive, but still ... odd to me. So I use a pen name here.
Whew. Hope this is helpful. Although you have to decide whether it is trustworthy on its own merits.
That works for me as well. A shame that a response so informative and well made with footnotes no less becomes suspect in this electronic age with sofisticated ‘bots by foreign actors (unnamed but rhymes with Prussian). I too am not an academic, but as Ernestine the operator said (possibly before your time) “I am a high school graduate.” I was also a prolific Op-Ed letter writer in the 1980s & ‘90s before the WWW and after the mid ‘90s discovered that any quip made online or even a paper letter sent to a newspaper would end up posted online and easily found by search engines (I often Google my own name to see what’s there) I took a Web persona “Shale” for all my forum boards where I might make NSFW comments. Now, retired and old I don’t care and free to be out there. :)
Rob, Often, there are no footnotes accompanying lin's comments. Her writing is always assertive and, sometimes, to my mind a bit condescending in some of her replies. With such certainty, which can be rewarding to read, is it not proper to ask about her background? When I queried lin about her interest in subject she had inquired about, and to which I replied, I received no response from her. Sometimes personalities don't match and that is a common occurrence. lin has been outstanding in addressing issues and has attracted interest in knowing a bit more about her. lin was generously forthcoming. I don't see any of this problematic. You Rob, have made yourself known in many respects. I appreciate all of it. Cheers!
ROB, very well put. I am interested in everything you write, and I don't think Deborah was out of place for asking. Thanks for your disclosure as well!
Lin, I add my thanks for your disclosure. By my estimation, you have my trust in what you write. It comes from the heart and is worthy to read. Thanks as well to Deborah, for asking so kindly.
Finally, in these times, I respect anyone's reasons for remaining anonymous. I know that several folks do that as well, but I would never divulge who -- just consider yourself in very good company Lin. I use my real name, but don't consider that to be better than anyone else!
Gus, The questions to lin were not intended as a request for any personal and private information. Her very active participation, certitude and strongly expressed opinions attracted attention. I believe our inquires were based on curiosity about her expertise and very generally about her background. As you noted, questions and answer were welcome. Doubt was deleted.
Yes, that works for me! Thank you so much for letting us know. After all, our queries should only make it extra clear to you that you are in the right company here, eh? Excellent. And thanks for watching CSpan. Ugh and good for you!
I listen to CSpan radio. It is important to me to hear people in their own words and in context.
It can be a chore. But then, for instance, there is Rhode Island's Sheldon Whitehouse who has done the work to become a congressional expert on Dark Money in general and the courts in particular.
For some reason (old phone, erratic internet access?) I am having trouble pasting links. But here are a few.
lin thank you so much for making the effort to share that information about yourself. I absolutely find your self-disclosure to be trustworthy. Honesty has a certain tone to it. A peaceful hum. Dishonesty likewise. A discordant sound. Your self-disclosure sounds completely trustworthy and honest to me, every word.
I'm curious as well, Deborah. lin, recently raised a question or two about journalism (if I remember correctly). After replying to her, I asked about her interest in journalism and her background without receiving a response. lin's certitude seems absolute and persistent. So, lin, care to share some more?
Take 2: Please forgive my huffiness. Here is a much kinder, mellifluous rendition on the importance of accuracy, as articulated so well by Rebecca Skolnit interviewed by Heather. Beg, borrow, or steal your way to it--I encourage everyone to view it. Smell the roses, grow the roses, be a warrior for truth and critical thinking, be more than an individual, we are the river...it's so good, I listened to it again.
Except you are not in the same company as Deborah. Instead of politely inviting a productive conversation, you made aggressive accusations that were false against 2 of your 3 targets, and with the 3rd, rather than follow the experience of others on how to neutralize trollers, you extolled your "investigation" without answering questions about your training, expertise, or identity.
Wow, I cannot believe it. For once, Trump used accurate words to describe something his regime did - the way they dealt with the coronavirus was indeed "unprecedented and incredible." Unprecedented and incredibly BAD.
In case anyone wonders how frantic El Blobbo is, "Communist Democrats"???? I guess he did learn something from Tailgunner Joe's lawyer, Roy Cohn: when you run out of things to say, say "communist."
So much for the old dramatic rule that the antagonist must be the equal of the protagonist. These people make drooling morons look like geniuses.
No kidding. I don’t think any of us would’ve been surprised to see that letter addressed to “Representative Ray-Ban” or “Representative Raygun” or “Representative Ropeburn.”
Wait a minute, hold the phone, let me get this straight. Are you suggesting, seriously suggesting, that this group of accomplices to the would-be American dictator, and these attempted-coup-flameouts, are not members of the cream of the crop of American society? Boy that’s really blowing my mind, I don’t know if I can take that in. It’s late, I’m going to have to sleep on that revelation.
Roland, get some sleep. When you wake up you'll be able to view the situation with a clear head and a deeper appreciation for the many sacrifices they've made to Make America Great Again.
I never heard my father swear or use foul language. My father would have called him a "dumb cluck". It took me decades to understand what my father was actually saying when he used that phrase.
Sorry about hijacking your thread, TC, I was cranky on reading HCR’s report after a long day of work. I went back to delete that post, not exactly my best ever, but already there were several replies, so I said “Phooey, what’s done is done” and let it ride.
I don't know how you do it, night after night! You didn't even give yourself a break this weekend! You are AMAZING!! Mere thanks do not convey my deep gratitude for your nightly commentaries.
Tonight's letter is another brilliant chronicle for the annals of history. Just as Herodotus is known as the very first chronicler of history, so, too, is Heather Cox Richardson, our preeminent chronicler of the 21st century -- and, at one of the most precarious and unsettling times in living memory.
Hear hear for Dr. Richardson! Another person diligently writing in these times is Jennifer Rubin of the Washington Post. She is fighting the good fight along with Dr. Richardson and we readers. Or wee readers; whichever the case may be.
I’m glad you included Jennifer Rubin in your comment. I have watch her evolution from a Red commentator to a nicely blue commentator for the last six years. Which ever her political bent, she is always thoughtful about her opinions, something I respect in people whether I agree with them or not. And, Boy Howdy! Can she shred anyone to their constituent parts when they richly deserve to be!
Thank you Heather for another fine consolidation of the facts which are being discovered by the Jan 6 committee, and the attempts to hide the information from the public. There is no question that there was a lot of involvement by members of congress and various appointed personnel. The corrupter in chief is hoping to hold out long enough to get a change in congress and end the committee. But if it serves it's purpose, there will be no second coming of Donald Trump, On a different aside, but something which has come to mind: do the religious right realize that the major tornado destruction occurred in the red states. Perhaps God is mad that they have abandoned their Christian teachings, How can they now blame climate change, after denying it for decades? And notice how quick our president was to offer aid to these very states that have been so outspoken about what a lousy national leader he is. I see him as a great, compassionate leader who will bend over backwards to assist Americans, regardless of their political persuasions, It really is time for the whole country to realize this, before democracy comes to a total end in America,
1) Kentucky voters elected a Democratic governor. And let's not lump all the 'red state' voters who vote for Democratic candidates with the Republican right wing religious extremists.
2) What the rest of us take as problems to be solved, such as climate disruption, pandemic disaster, and violent conflict - Republican right wing religious extremists take as signs and wonders, prophecies of the end days fulfilled. They prayer for Apocalypse Now, as though that were a good thing. Of course - they don't leave relief to religion, but demand government aid. Don't expect these GOP true believers to be rational or honorable - about religion or government.
Then it must be pretty confusing for the God you are referring to in the case of a Red State with a Blue Governor. How very difficult it is to hear judgement day rhetoric when the people of my State are suffering.
Barbara, I don't think anyone here is claiming that Gd sent tornadoes to kill people wholesale. It's a tragedy. The mounting deaths of unvaccinated people from covid also are a tragedy, and those are largely inflicted by the political disinformation about vaccines..
If I understand him correctly, Charles is simply calling out those people who callously cheer on suffering of their opponents, calling it judgment from Gd, and then change their tune when troubles fall on them.
Sometimes the excuses claim to be religious, sometimes not. Rand Paul, for example, refused to vote for relief for other states when it was needed, but dropped all his justifications when it became his state that needs help. Morally, that actually puts him higher than the politicians who oppose public health measures even to keep their own people alive (Missouri AG, we see you.)
Barbara, if you know of local organizations providing relief to your fellow Kentuckians, please post here. Having just lived through an EF0 tornado ripping through my neighborhood with 65-85 mph winds, I can’t begin to imagine what that EF4 or 5 could and did do with upwards of 200mph winds-for more than 6 hours and a distance of 250 miles!! I don’t care what their politics are. Those folks need help. Does American Red Cross work in your region?
I think it unhelpful and near enough to incendiary to bring the tornado into the blue-red divide that drives so much of what is happening politically.
This was a tragedy of significant and frightening dimensions. We do not know the full extent of the death and destruction yet. Once again Nature has bared her fangs and we should be humble in response.
Certainly Kentucky and other states are generally Republican leaning. Certainly there are those who twist such events to suit a reset of religious convictions which seem to me to range from bizarre to abhorrent.
That does not lessen for one second the terror that Americans in that area of the US felt in the few seconds when they felt the full blast of the tornado. It doesn’t lessen the panic felt by those who were conscious and trapped after it had passed. It doesn’t lessen the grief that people who lost loved ones are feeling at this moment. It doesn’t lessen the compassion we should feel for those who have lost everything and have no clue what the next weeks and months will bring.
In today’s world, the above likely sounds sanctimonious to many of you. So be it. It’s been a hate-filled few years and any solutions to America’s problems will not spring from those who hate.
I’m all for “the fight” that’s going on now to bring to justice those who have carried America to the brink of being a failed democracy. I’m somewhat panicked at the extent to which this plot had legs. I’ve just finished reading the infamous PowerPoint and am galled at the impunity with which Meadows and others are behaving. I’m sure part of it is driven by what appears to be the pusillanimity and lethargy of the Department of Justice.
But the tornado didn’t give a shit about the curious politics of any of those whom it hammered. It is yet another reminder that climate change has given the dial that controls our weather events a vicious upward twist.
Finally, I do not wish to eviscerate you Charles Wax, who wrote that post. I have been brought to grief many times by the thoughtlessness of my own words to know full well the instinct from which yours came. I have a sense that many of us on this forum are getting angrier and more intemperate, no doubt due to the frustration we feel at the slowness of justice. We just need to maintain an understanding that all of us feel pain, regardless of political impulse. And every once in a while an event will occur which magnify some people’s pain a thousandfold. That calls for unmitigated compassion. We stand there today.
It wasn't Putin's doing - the system was doomed at the outset by its own flaws. When you have a central government which is limited in its power and allows all powers it doesn't specifically claim for itself to be claimed by individual states, you have a loose association of semi-autonomous countries vying to control critical aspects of people's lives ranging from voting rights to contraception.
'high horse, indeed. '...by what appears to be the pusillanimity and lethargy of the Department of Justice'. Is there any credit to you for at least writing 'appears'? You do, indeed, not know if Attorney General, Garland, and the Department of Justice are guilty of 'pusillanimity' and 'lethargy', guilty of lack of courage or determination and a lack of energy and enthusiasm.; timidity! It's impressive to use the word 'pusillanimity' though. To quote you, Eric: 'I have been brought to grief many times by the thoughtlessness of my own words to know full well the instinct from which yours came.'
We are impatient, we are worried, we know so little about what DOJ doing or when whatever will be delivered. We're frightened and we need answers. Is the DOJ GUITLY? It doesn't look good. As for horses?
The DOJ is doing it right, and that does NOT happen over night.
BTW: Are you having fun yet Fern!!
I am actually in a hospital waiting room while my daughter is having (scheduled) surgery, and her surgical team is, from my professional RN view during her pre-op interview, that they are incredibly competent, professional, highly skilled, compassionate - and hysterically FUN & FUNNY! What a wonderfully happy, relaxed and confident patient they created! And mom.
I use words as they come to me Fern, each when they feel appropriate. Including ‘pusillanimity’.
I’ll not apologize for that.
And yes, ‘appears’ seemed appropriate. None of us can be certain what is happening in the that giant bureaucracy, the DOJ.
But if I (and many other ordinary citizens feel that way), then surely the other side is noticing with what apparent (wiggle word, again :) ease they can tie the forces of decency in knots. This is my worry.
Did you believe on February 1, 2021, after the euphoria of Biden’s inauguration had subsided, that at the end of 2021 Trump would not only have not been brought to legal account on at least some basis, he would effectively rule the Republican Party as a despot?
Did you believe on that long past date no significant actor in the insurrection would have been charged for a role in its planning?
Did you believe that NO legislative action would have been taken on behalf of Americans whose voting rights were being mercilessly shredded?
Did you believe that the Republicans would still be in the ascendancy enough to initiate the Christmas card fiasco after mass murder in a high school?
Did you believe that a legitimate investigation of January 1, working at full throttle, would be at the mercy of the DOJ to try to compel testimony from witnesses who asserted non-existent executive privilege?
Did you believe that two Senators would still be thumbing their noses at their own party without there having been some response in terms of the filibuster?
I care not if you pick apart any of those questions and demonstrate with citations how wrong I am to have expected action in a given area? My overriding point is that time moves on relentlessly towards a perilous deadline in November 22 and that Republicans, who should by all rights be having their “dark night of the soul”, are instead swaggering trolling, threatening, and plotting God knows what else. It’s ass backwards from what it should be.
We need action, beyond what the Select Committee is fighting to do. There are days when I could spit nails and this is one of them.
What I appreciate, Eric, is that you are speaking from the heart. You’re over there in Canada, not far away as the crow flies but in a very different country and milieu at this point in history, and your concern for the state of democracy in the USA is deep and sincere. I for one appreciate you very much.
Thank you for your response, Eric. I do not come to America's divide only with citations. You have pointed out before that my comments are often backed by links to my sources. In response, you may note that I pick the subjects and chose the sources. It is my experience in the civil rights and anti-war movements beginning in adolescence; work in tv broadcast as a associate producer in news, a producer and executive producer of public affairs programming and much else that enable me to find and select articles, studies, etc., of high caliber and to organize the material in a cogent way. That information is stitched with my considerations of the matter at hand. Generally, I am reluctant to pour my feelings over a comment, but naturally everything I do reflects feelings. I frequently comment using what has been stored in my mind, nothing more. In answer to the questions you posed, I would answer 'yes' to most of them. From my college major on, I have been a student of America's strengths and weakness. Frustration, disappointments, anger, commercialism, effort, advancement, inequality, comforts, beauty, waste and freedom, common to educated, middle-class and socially conscious Americans have been mine. While believing this country was headed for big trouble, did I expect this, not quite. I responded to your use of 'pusillanimity' and 'lethargy' with feeling. I simply do not believe that Garland and the DOJ guilty of lack of courage or determination or a lack of energy and enthusiasm. It revolted me to read that. I am deeply disturbed at the seeming slowness of the DOJ to take necessary actions and I look for analysis from those who know the USA's rule of law. Lawrence Tribe, one of Garland's teachers, appears to be full of discontent. I need to know more. Accusations without substance/evidence as I see it can rile me up.
I have said recently, so this will not be new, that I deeply fear that the hold Trump and his followers have on the country is based often on intimidation. This is tremendously concerning, as it could one sorrowful day be the tipping point taking control away from the people.
This was part of Trump’s schtick from the get go. From the safety of his heavily guarded podium, he abused journalists, mocking one by imitating his disability. He talked about the “good old days” when police were “not as gentle as they are now” in maintaining crowd control. He was contemptuous of McCain for being imprisoned in Vietnam.
There is a certain kind of person, most often lacking in stature and power in his own life, to whom this is pure catnip. They jumped on his bandwagon and have competed to be the toughest of his legion. They talked tough in their corner of the country for years, and then many assembled on January 6. Together they became a rabble and acted out their power fantasies. Many were doing it for an audience of one.
Now this sort of brazen, violence-threatening intimidation is spreading. Election workers are quitting in droves because they fear for their lives if they work in 2022 and 2024. Politicians are quitting. The field is being left open to the Trump lickspittles and a shrinking number who amazingly refuse to be cowed.
Getting death threats is no joke. I am sure that many people have had dozens of sleepless nights, trying to convince themselves that the threat they received was spat out in anger and not to be taken seriously.
Having people show up on your street, perhaps at your door to hurl invective must be terrifying. That is happening.
All of it is of a piece. There is a portion of the Trump crowd who see themselves as brave and even heroic in committing such offenses.
My fear is this. Has some form of intimidation weakened key American legal institutions? It would be odd if there were not prosecutors who were not thinking uneasy thoughts as they pursue Trump legally. They must at least have some sense that their life would be in high danger the moment Trump was charged. The same goes for prosecutors who would bring a case against Gosar or Boebert or any of the others who seem to have given material assistance to the insurrectionists.
I do know that there are plenty of American heroes - there is no other word - who take the invective and threats and work doggedly on.
But I am beginning to fear that cases involving Trump or anyone very close to him are being slow-walked. The logic will be that you get only one chance to chop the head off the snake…
But there may be personal fear involved. There may also be institutional fear - people who are leery to take Trump on directly because it would incite mass violence.
And I have no citations for this. Just a lot of concern that is coalescing into suspicion as days and months go by in the face of an inexorably ticking clock.
Occasionally, when facing horrible circumstances beyond our personal experience, we seek to learn and act as necessary. Life has changed and situation could become completely catastrophic. Once recognizing the circumstances, emotion runneth over as terror takes hold for some. With others, ego and emotion runneth over. It is difficult to keep thinking and acting beyond venting emotions while not ignoring them. In a way or two we may be further apart than you think.
"Perhaps God is mad that they have abandoned their Christian teachings."
GOD is Love and only Love.
...the sun shines on every person in the same way as does the rain.
We are the ones who assign GOD into our self-conceived box because of our inability to fully comprehend the undeserved blessing of HIS unlimited Love for each one of us.
Thank you for codifying this week’s political pathos into bite sized pieces.
In my Spring, there was Kennedy getting shot in Texas. Civil Rughts and Vietnam seethed. Now, in my early Fall, we’re in crisis over Trump, a grifter who would turn our Constitution on its head for a dime. He is shameless in his hurry to burn down the house.
It’s defeating to dwell on this any more tonight. But, again, thank you. Your letters frame the first draft of our week’s prequel. You help our wingspan updraft over warm currents.
As I have pointed out here a couple of times. I was stationed at LeJeune in 70-71 with 4th Bn 10th Marines. We as well 82nd Airborne were as 82nd Airborne were trained in riot control in case of rioters in Washington DC attacking the Capitol. They would have Chinook-ed us up to DC and trucked supplies in Six-bys following our departure. This was the plan as decided by Washington DC.
Perhaps, this was initiated by the Secretary of Defense?
That the opposite, using the National Guard, was prescribed for rioters attacking the Capitol and Congress is astounding. Our contingent had no live rounds with the exception of sharpshooters. And that prior heads of the Department of Defense were worried about Federal troops is laughable. The National Guard is controlled by state governors who apparently believe politics surpass their oaths of office to the state and federal government.
People fear the military. It is the politicians we need to fear.
Using Federal troops to defend the Capitol is not the issue. The issue is the Constitution does not appear to consider a rogue President who would be King as supported by various political congressional, senatorial, and politically appointed actors. In passing, how would you react to meeting one who supported the overthrow of our nation?
The next in command and in line to trump, Pence, knew this was going to take place and did nothing to warn others or take action to prevent it. He allowed the attack take place. He is just as complicit in his nonactions to overthrow the US government. Still trying to place innocent, the coward.
Military officers swear an oath to defend the Constitution;
" 'I' do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter"
It does not say allegiance to the President. It says to the Constitution. It also says defend against domestic threats. Others and legal minds may differ with my opinion or reading. However, and in my opinion, the Flynn brothers need to be chased to the equivalent of the Brig in the Army, court-martialed and stripped of rank and military privileges.
There is more to this than what has been put forth. We need to examine where the system has failed us leading up to this "One Day in January."
"People fear the military. It is the politicians we need to fear.
"Using Federal troops to defend the Capitol is not the issue. The issue is the Constitution does not appear to consider a rogue President who would be King as supported by various political congressional, senatorial, and politically appointed actors. In passing, how would you react to meeting one who supported the overthrow of our nation?"
Thank you for this. It is what I have thought over and over...the framers of the Constitution never in a million years ever could have imagined an giant orange man-baby would be trying to stage a coup, AND be supported by a network of governmental entities in that take-over. How does one make provisions for that? As you said, the system doesn't exactly spell out how to counter and deal with something like this. Federal troops? National Guard? Who's in charge in such a scenario? Yes, we really do need to examine where there are problems in the chains-of-command, ESPECIALLY if a sitting President* is the one actually instigating--even tacitly--a coup. I hope a lot of this can "come out in the wash", as they say.
You wrote: "However, and in my opinion, the Flynn brothers need to be chased to the equivalent of the Brig in the Army, court-martialed and stripped of rank and military privileges."
Alas, our Constitution appears to have a new amendment: freedom to interpret (without understanding or regard for others). This leaves the question of whether some sworn to defend our Constitution are defending the document or an interpretation. The current SCOTUS majority and too many other state and federal courts and judges aren’t helping.
It is almost as if truth responds in a scientific way, much like warm air rising. You can try and put a lid on it, but it persists in blowing the lid off. Thank you Professor and to this fine community of readers and writers. Namaste 🙏
Dear Dr. R, another clearly written, concise letter of facts. What the former President and his henchmen and minions did stuns me every time I read this. No rule of law for them unless they made it up. No working for our country but against it, all for power and money. Justice must prevail, it just must. You wrote all through the weekend and we thank you. Please, please take care of yourself!
Let’s hear it for the Congressional Research Service and aides for an incredible reconstruction of events, and Professor Richardson for such a lucid narrative! Heres hoping the bad actors will cave in soon under pressure, and that the former Trump administration will have its “ John Dean moment,” albeit belatedly.
I was just talking yesterday with a family member about John Dean - I like your phrasing of a "John Dean moment." Here's hoping we have one with this insurrection. Agree wholeheartedly on your praise of Professor Richardson's work here!
I would start by looking at the encrypted phone calls, and why was he using a system like that, when the WH had a system in place to keep track of all communications in order to be able to make them available to scholars in the future. Surely our intelligence community is capable of deciphering whatever he was trying to hide.
Failure to obey the requirement that he turn over all communications. That there is content there that he does not want revealed even after all he has released is quite a piece of information.
Army mom here, so I'm biased, but I wonder if the delay was the coup plotters couldn't count on the National Guard to back THEM against the people? I think the DC National Guard was begging for approval to help the Capitol Police and the DC Metropolitan Police and were hella frustrated to be told to hold and wait for the Pentagon to approve
Looks like it to me, and my only connection to the Army is my dad's service in the Army Air Force in WWII. It was weird when then-Pres Tramp (no insult intended to anyone else) replaced so many Pentagon people with personal servants right after the election. The coup plotters couldn't count on any military to back them against the Constitution, so the plan was to keep the Army and the Guard out of the way while their thugs did damage.
Yes, this - the whole "move Kash Patel to the Pentagon" story is going to be interesting to learn (he apparently spent time with the Jan. 6 Committee recently). My uncle also served in the Army Air Corps in WWII - respect to your Dad
The committee’s job is incredibly focused and important: to uncover the truth. We, the public, are supposed to be active participants in caring about facts and maintaining justice.
They can’t do our job. But they aren’t giving up on us. They are doing brilliant work in hope the public come through.
We cannot lay the blame at their feet. It’s up to us to take up oxygen with truth, push back against propaganda and hold media accountable.
“Also, action is needed now before we “vote strategically.” Whatever is in your comfort zone, please support candidates/ incumbents fighting the good fight.
Here’s a great place to start looking for candidates to support.” (Kathy, thanks for your words.)
Thank you, Jan ! I know they can use “ boots on the ground” . Small donations also help build campaigns. Val Demings is gaining on Rubio in Fl( with all his Repub dark $$$)
Another great timeline of compact, clear information. Many, many thanks.
I don't know how many hours a day you are working Dr. Richardson, or how much support and help you have in assembling this information, or how much time "off" you have.
But, as a person who started working long hours around 12 years old and did so until I was outsourced at age 60, I can say: It is not healthy for you or your local people to work too many hours no matter how important you (or anyone) perceives that work to be.
Do give an eye to your health and well being. I do kindly recommend taking time away from whatever maelstrom you might have entered and do so often. It will be great to have your writing around over the long term.
Working all the time is definitely a health compromising approach to this walk through "life".
Being healthy tomorrow is just as important as what happens with these rich guys today, who are very likely going to get away with all that stuff they did on January 6th anyway.
I’m getting the impression that Prof. Heather is invigorated by her work and does not let it tire her…that’s what happens when you do what you love, and love what you do! She seems to find a balance and lives in a beautiful place that gives her peace and some measure of contentment
I am only guessing here. But this research and writing likely is part of her full time job at BC. Professors do lots more than just teach, and research and writing is a large part of that. They have discretion over what they choose to research. I don’t know if she’s teaching this semester, or how many classes if so, but I’ll just hazard a guess that all of this work falls squarely under her role as professor.
Every evening I look forward to reading your Letters from an American. Every evening my hair stands on end for a longer and longer time. I cannot conceive the depths the previous administration sank to, and yet, I learn each day the depths are deeper and deeper. Are we looking at the Mariana Trench of official crime and corruption in the Executive Branch of the government of the United States of America? I am stunned that most Republicans believe the former guy and support him unequivocally. I simply do not understand the staying power of that man nor the cultish devotion he receives. I try to read a few articles and interviews of people who are respected for their intellectual abilities to describe their views without inflammatory rhetoric. I cannot finish reading any of the “right of center” without being completely offended by assertions that believers in progressive policies are haters of America (true! Interview in this weekend’s Wall Street Journal) and all progressives want is the destruction of the Great American Experiment! Really! I want to destroy the country I love? I was so offended by that statement I steamed for quite a while!
I intended to write a grateful thank you to Heather Cox Richardson for the work and research she does to produce her Letters from an American. I hope she sees my gratitude first and my rant as a pent up release to a soul who may accept a kindred soul’s despair. I am very afraid.
In regard to being afraid:
Heather herself firmly repeats that she is in it for the long haul and has faith in the American people to assert our will--listen to her video chats on Facebook and YouTube, if you haven't already.
American historian HCR + optimistic lawyer political analyst Robert Hubbell is a good recipe for keeping the faith and getting direction on concrete action for democracy. As Robert writes:
"Since the early days of this newsletter, I have urged my family (and readers) to maintain perspective by taking a long-term view. If we focus on the last four hours, it is easy to work ourselves into a frenzy. But if we measure our progress over the long term, we increase the likelihood that we will remain in the fight until we achieve ultimate victory."
https://roberthubbell.substack.com/p/todays-edition-a-glimmer-of-hope
At my age, the long haul is all I can attest to. It is not an easy load I carry, but carry it I will
Right there with Jeri Chilcutt.
Right there with do17.
If I have to find kindness, warmth, generosity and a bit of fun, I'll look for you, Gus. Cheers!
Gus and Fern,
Please count me in (and apologies for the prepositional ending)!
Long term optimism/short term pessimism has demonstrated its value countless times in the past. We can expect things to get worse in the near term but need to work for a victory that will be longer in coming.
Jim, my very bright 18 year old grandson told me this precisely about a year ago. The kids will be alright.
I don't know about that. David Leonhardt's "the morning" this morning raises frightening questions about the survival of our Democracy. The Democrats are really going to have to come together to counter this stuff, at a grass roots level unless all the voting rights legislation gets passed. Here's Leonhardt:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/13/briefing/anti-democratic-movement-us-politics.html
Yes, I read that, too. It gets hard to find that pony in the room full of shit.
Jim, You have appeared to be a strong critic of the Washington Post and the New York Times, the two leading newspapers in the country. They have faults, weaknesses and in the case of the NY Times several of the paper's judgements have been damaging. Withal, I respect both papers and they have been along with others our sources of facts and provided solid guidance in many areas of our lives. Beyond that, I am a fervent supporter of the Free Press. Your attacks have seemed lacking in substance and almost automatically generated. It may be harsh. I welcome your response. A portion of my comment yesterday has been added to this one. Peace.
'HCR's historical foundation, keen mind and lucid prose are supported by the work of the journalists in the USA and around the world. It is the journalists who are responsible for bringing us as close as possible to the truth of what is happening in our country and elsewhere. Journalists matter. If you look through today's letter with an eye to how many times journalists are referred to as the source of information and if you closely look at the list of the Letter' sources under the 'Note", you will 'note' who Heather Cox Richard's and subscribers to LFAA are depending upon. We cannot dismiss or overlook the role of journalists in keeping democracy alive.'
'Why Is Freedom Of The Press Important in a Democracy?'
'Freedom of the press states that expression and communication through published media – like in print and video – is a right. Freedom of the press is codified in multiple documents that set international standards. A government should not interfere with this freedom or censor media that’s critical of state power. For years, freedom of the press has been an essential part of democracy. In a democracy, people have the right to choose their government either directly or by electing representatives. Why is freedom of the press so important for democracy to thrive? What are the threats to this freedom?'
'Truth, accountability, and informed voting: reasons why freedom of the press matters
A healthy democracy has guiding principles like citizen rule, fair and free elections, the protection of individual rights, and cooperation. To ensure these principles become a reality, a free press is important. There are three main reasons why:'
'A free press fights for the truth'
'Freedom of the press matters because a free press uncovers the truth. There are many issues – often very complicated ones – that journalists are trained to analyze and explain. Without newspapers, radio shows, blogs, etc, the average person would have little to no knowledge of what’s going on around them. Most people lack the time and resources to investigate issues and stories that affect them and their communities. That’s where journalists come in. Armed with skills like research and critical thinking, the best journalists know what questions to ask, what leads to pursue, and how to fact-check. Fact-checking is a vital element of a free press. If the press is not able to fact-check safely and effectively, the truth remains buried.'
'A free press holds power accountable'
'Many entities can benefit from the truth staying hidden, including governments. One of the free press’ main missions is serving as a watchdog on power. The press is the bridge between the people and powerful entities. If the press is not free but instead beholden to power, it simply serves as an extension of that power. Without freedom of the press, journalists who try to tell the truth when it threatens the state are not protected by the law. This makes censorship and suppression inevitable. Even if a state made it a goal to be more truthful and transparent, there’s always an agenda they would need to serve. In the case of corruption and human rights violations, a free press is essential to exposing abuses of power.'
'A free press informs voters and strengthens democracy'
'Informed voting is the third reason why freedom of the press is so important. Democracies only thrive when voters are as informed as possible. Being informed ensures people understand the issues at hand and what policies and politicians best represent them. The press is the body that informs by analyzing information, encouraging discussion, and fact-checking. The freer the press, the better informed voters can be. Without this freedom, voters would be at the mercy of politicians and special interest groups that want to win elections and promote specific legislation. It would be very difficult and time-consuming for voters to do all their work on their own. A strong media makes the process less complicated and offers valuable insight.' (HumanRightsCareers) See link below.
https://www.humanrightscareers.com/issues/why-is-freedom-of-the-press-important-in-a-democracy/
The NYT had a policy of deliberate bias on certain issues under Sulzberger Jr. See for example:
https://cis.org/Kammer/New-York-Times-Radical-Transformation-Immigration
For the immigration history that the NYT, NPR, etc, seem unaware of, I highly recommend the new book, Back of the Hiring Line: A 200-year history of immigration surges, employer bias, and depression of Black wealth, by Roy Beck. It is very well researched, with academic economic history, multiple gov't commissions on immigration reform, all of which recommended reducing immigration, statements of Black leaders beginning w/ Frederick Douglass, and Black periodicals. Beck repeatedly tells readers not to blame immigrants, who also currently suffer from too much immigration; that Congress is to blame for legislating mass immigration despite the findings of the gov't commissions. $9 on Amazon.
Also, see "Judith Miller" and "Jayson Blair".
Fern-- all very true perhaps, but this relates to my comment how exactly?
It relates to a couple of comments you have made about the press. I explained my reading of those comments and offered my response to them.
With your words and spirit we see the sunrise and feel refreshed by the promise of a new day. Salud, Ellie.
I appreciate this link. I went to his newsletter and really liked what I saw - as well as the fact that he seems to follow up with subscribers' comments! So, now I'm officially a subscriber, thanks to you!
Robert is wonderful!
You convinced me.
Thanks, as always, Ellie!!
Hello bright light. Shine, you do!
Morning Fern! May it be Good and Fun!
'Fun', I like the word. What does it mean; I forgot!
Your chalkenge today! Redefine Fun. Happy experimenting!
Thank you, Ellie, for that cold splash in the face! I can get wound up and rant angrily or despairingly to the point that my husband tells me it’s time to go on a complete news fast. There are times when I do just that. Since the pandemic, I, like most of the rest of the world, limit my personal interactions so that I have also limited my availability to hear other points of view, admittedly from friends who are mostly progressives, but still have divergent senses of the near-term fate of our country. Even my otherwise staid husband will put his uber-cynical hat on and turn the air blue.
So, to have you say we are not all going to fall into a bottomless pit of authoritarianism is helpful indeed! Again, thank you very much!
Betsy
I have no crystal ball, but optimism fuels creative resistance to authoritarianism. At the end of Heather’s interview yesterday of Rebecca Solnit, Rebecca described a lovely image that change is inevitable and we are the river, while trumpers are a dam that will be overrun. Rebecca also talked about needing both bread and roses, i.e. life balance, and being more than one to effect social change. So yes, take care of yourself! We take turns rejuvenating.
https://www.facebook.com/559835551/videos/3203517459932139/
Exactly this
You read my mind. BTW the WSJ is now Rupert’s rag, just Fox in print. When I read that he had bought it (years ago), my heart sank. It’s his pretense of being a newspaper man, His New York Post is just another Enquirer. That Chris Wallace lent his journalism chops to Fox made my heart sink as well. Fox was anything but Fair and Balanced from day one. The big lie started there. Thank God there are diggers of truth, hopefully to reveal a mountain of treason, sedition, and lies to rival Hitler’s big lie and Goebbels 5 main propaganda rules (got banned from Twitter for posting them as Repub strategy). All this to be front and center in 2022.
Okay, so I posted the Hitler/Goebbels 5 main propoganda rules, intending to add a message suggesting comparison to t-Rump, but facebook deleted the post and banned me from making political posts for 30 days, too! I tried to object but "in these pandemic times" they claim to not have the staff to review it. But my t-Rumper relatives can post political LIES and LIBEL, and sail right through the censor algorithym.
My anti-chump posts must have made their algorithm go bananas. FB can bite it, especially since their data breach a while back dumped my info on the dark web. I still get spam calls and had to change passwords, etc. a real bummer…
Horrors. Do you have any recourse?
Have you tried arguing with FB, as futile as any task ever
It was clear in their message back to me that there would be no argument, case closed. F$#@ing futile.
Wow, I will post the same thing
What are the 5 main propaganda rules used by goebbel? I don't think you will be banned here?
Short and sweet, Propaganda 101
1. If you tell a lie big enough, and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it
2. Accuse the other side of that which you are guilty.
3. Propaganda works best when those who are being manipulated are confident that they are acting on their own free will.
4. It (is) vitally important for the State...to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus the greatest enemy of the State.
-Joseph Goebbels, Reich Minister for "Public Enlightenment" in Nazi Germany
Tis this that I said described republican verbiage in November 2020. Twitter said it violated "community standards." It describes their verbiage even more now. I first noticed No. 2 when Karl Rove was foisting W on Texas. I think Nixon used it first.
Somehow Karl Rove escaped the deserved consequence of Treason for his public outing of former CIA Intelligence Agency officer Valerie Plame because Rove wanted to destroy her career for her contradicting the republican WH rationale for going to war with Iraq.
He has continued to be a slimy Fox arse, surprised that he didn’t wind up in chump’s WH. Jail would have done it for me. And I thought W/Dickie was as low as they could go. Silly me…
Expanded Goebbels quote #1.
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, ...
... for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."
Substitute dictator for state and there you have it.
Wow, yes, absolute description of trump, et al.
The media and all his little lockstep asskissers repeating, repeating, repeating the big lie...it even got me wondering if there may be a kernel of truth to it? Then, it's like no, don't believe it, then it's like no, don't believe anything! Which I know, is another tenant of authoritarianism!
We NEED another iteration of the Fairness doctrine. Most folks I talk to have never heard of it, so, I take up oxygen.
Ty for this summary.
Another tenet of Goebbels (not with this that I put on Twitter) is that the Big Lie is more believable if it has a kernel of truth to make the lie more plausible. May have been in the James Murphy translation of Mein Kampf that I read an excerpt from. describes how "purposeful lying can be used as effective propaganda." I'm sure Rupert has read it.
Number 5?
Sorry, my math was never good
https://www.physics.smu.edu/pseudo/Propaganda/goebbels.html
Thanks for this posting. I was going to post it but here you have done it. Both Goebbels and Hitler had propaganda principles far greater than "five" and far more sophisticated. More, merely than "the bigger the lie the better it is believed." https://www.physics.smu.edu/pseudo/Propaganda/goebbels.html
Thanks for this, Patti.
Exactly!
Ditto Moscowmitch and his devoted minions...
In early March 2020, Congress held public hearings about the Jan 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. Unlike other services, the Defense Department sent a career official who was not a main operational decision-makers at the Pentagon on that day.
Testifying for the DC National Guard, was Commander William Walker, whose late January statements to The Washington Post, had spurred the hearings. Walker spoke about changes Trump appointed officials had made to the chain of command leading up to Jan 6 and the unusual strictures on the DC Guard that day.
Not only was the DC Commander now required to get written directives for deployment from two command streams - the leaders of which were jockeying for priority and one of whom had gone missing in action - he was barred from having his troops ready for deployment. The Trump administration had even hobbled the small rapid response team designed to protect troops on duty - who'd they denied personal protective and defensive equipment.
In an operation which itself was logistically fraught, Walker side stepped Executive branch and Pentagon obstruction to readiness, by secretly having troops gear up and then hiding them while awaiting permission to deploy. Had Walker not taken this personal responsibility, the DC Guard would have been delayed hours more than the 4-5 hours delay imposed by the Pentagon - when every second counted.
Part of the Republican campaign to present the sacking of the Capitol as a kerfuffle, is their demand to know how many armed protestors were apprehended and how many guns confiscated. This is disingenuous. The Trump administration had incited raucous protests to become a violent riot and then allowed the riot to become an insurrection. By the time the National Guard was allowed on the grounds, defense of the Capitol was no longer possible and the mission was to safely clear the Capitol. No measures had been taken nor were there sufficient numbers of troops to make and process arrests. As a result, armed rioters, who can be seen in tactical gear and with weapons on videos, were able to slip away.
Part of the delay to adjudicating the insurrection is caused by having to access and analyze many thousands of hours of video, track down individuals, and then make the evidence available to lawyers who must do their own analysis and interpretations. In the context of participants who not only had tactical gear but tactical training in covert operations - you didn't think the armed militias Republicans have been playing footsie with all these decades were just play acting did you? Not after other armed attacks on government property by such as the Bundy's? They've been revved up for revolution by Republican right wing extremists and they've been rehearsing. Rhetoric has intent and has consequences.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4949771/dc-national-guard-commander-testifies-unusual-delay-approval-send-troops-secure-capitol#
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/capitol-riot-hearing/2021/03/02/a4867a48-7b81-11eb-85cd-9b7fa90c8873_story.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/30/us/jan-6-capitol-attack-takeaways.html
The events and evidence already available for public review clearly prove the intent and guilt of a number of individuals to interfere with the peaceful and legitimate transfer of power to a new administration legitimately elected in a free and fair election. It must be clear these are serious federal crimes and all of those involved should be held accountable and punished accordingly. That accountability and punishment is the responsibility of the Department of Justice and our court system. We also should expect Congress to fulfill its legitimate and legal role of both oversight of the Executive branch and legislate accordingly to prevent and punish any reoccurrence. Congress must assure the American public has the full and real story of what happened and pass its findings on to DOJ with appropriate criminal referrals wherever appropriate. It matters not the office or position of any miscreants involved in criminal behavior, all those involved must be held accountable.
From LFAA: "The report from the January 6 Committee also notes that Meadows apparently used an encrypted phone and that he communicated frequently with members of Congress about challenging the election."
Don't you wonder who those "members of Congress" are? Would that be what Meadows is attempting to prevent Verizon from releasing?
We already know from reports by Rolling Stone and the Hill of a number of the usual suspects who participated in both planning and organizing for the 6th riots. You can read of the reported names here:
https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/578251-jan-6-protest-organizers-say-they-communicated-with-conservative
Thank you for the link. From that article: "The two sources for the Rolling Stone piece said the members who either participated in the work or sent top staffers included GOP Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.), Paul Gosar (Ariz.), Lauren Boebert (Colo.), Mo Brooks (Ala.), Madison Cawthorn (N.C.), Andy Biggs (Ariz.) and Louie Gohmert (Texas.)."
I would be guessing, but I would also put into the hopper a few more names: Cruz, Hawley, Kennedy, McCarthy, Gaetz, Jordan, Nunes, Scalise, Johnson...and probably more. If they are checking the phone records of the entire Sedition Caucus, no wonder this is taking so long.
I have written to several members of the House Select Committee and AG Merrick Garland requesting the criminal referrals and the appointment of a special counsel to address all of those referrals. The appointment of a special counsel will achieve protection of the investigation and prosecution from political interference in both the investigation and any relevant prosecutions regardless of any changes in Congress or the Executive branch.
Is Garland actually up to the challenge?
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"The events and evidence already available for public review clearly prove the intent and guilt of a number of individuals.."
Whew. Eek. Not so fast. What looks like evidence, clear proof, intent, and guilt to 'common sense' is entirely inadmissible to adjudication of the law and contrary to due process.
Even juries must be instructed on the law before rendering their decision of the facts of a case.
I agree completely with the legal process and standards of our justice system. However, I stand by exactly the phrasing of my comments. Were I delivering the opening statement of a trial to hold those responsible accountable, I would use these words as written in my remarks to the jury, and the presiding judge would permit them as written. It is important in prosecution of these crimes to show and prove “beyond a reasonable doubt” that the crimes were committed by the defendant and that the accused was aware of the criminality of their actions and had intent to commit the crimes. I believe firmly that evidentiary standard is met by the publicly available information. It is not my role to declare guilt as I am not a member of a jury to judge the guilt or innocence of those accused. However, I am a citizen impacted adversely by their actions and fully entitled to request our judicial system to investigate and if warranted prosecute them.
Hello Lin, What is the basis for this statement: "What looks like evidence, clear proof, intent, and guilt to 'common sense' is entirely inadmissible to adjudication of the law and contrary to due process." You have brilliantly laid out the wrong doing and treasonous obstruction in your first post, but suddenly back away from the idea that any of this is subject to prosecution and justice. So what are we to do - write the history of this insurrection, but sit back and sigh because there was nothing we could do about it? The insurrection couldn't be more clear - it's almost getting boring reading about it - are there no laws in your mind that have been broken? And is there no legal redress? And anyway, why are we counting angels dancing on the head of a judicial pin when the traitorous insurrection is continuing and we are on a fast track to dictatorship? Are you saying we should follow the letter of the law to its tiniest vanishing point while they are shouldering their AK 47s and readying their liberal concentration camps?
Whew. Oops. I only meant to say, what you or I might mean by "evidence, clear proof, intent, and guilt" in the public square or private conversation is not the same as the meanings of these words in a court of law.
This is one reason the disingenuous and dodgy 'textualism' perpetrated by conservative jurists is a con job. Dictionaries do not fix the meanings of words for all time or even for one time. Dictionaries, selectively, trace the trajectories of words through social space. Courts are a very formal and specific social space. Law has its own dictionaries. Its vocabulary and meanings are not necessarily on the tip of our tongues or in our texts.
I listen to oral arguments on the radio. I also once spent a few days in court. It became clear to me that not only the meanings of the words, but the protocols governing their use are very specific in that context. They determine what is evidence and what sort it is. And even how it can be admitted and considered.
For instance, proof in any event (except perhaps mathematics) is rarely clear and almost always the result of coming to consensus by rules of order. And that process is very different in court than on the street corner.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_audio/2021
Even in mathematics, some mathematicians reject the ‘proof’ of Fermat’s last theorem because a computer algorithm was used!
We agree that words have power and are differently relevant in differing contexts. I am calling to question your bold and strongly worded statement "is entirely inadmissible to adjudication of the law and contrary to due process." Strong words!! It sounds like you are saying our common sense interpretation of treasonous acts will not have any relevance in the legal system. Your comments are often illuminating, but my question was a genuine one - is there reason to think our legal system will not be able to hold these treasonable acts accountable? If so, I'd like some specifics as to why this is so. We are all terrified Trump et al will get away with it. So a serious discussion about what can be used in court would be welcome. I'm sure they are having these kinds of discussions at the highest levels of the DOJ even as we speak.
Thank You.
Yes, I think our common usage of the words evidence, proof, guilt etc does not apply to court proceedings. The 'court of public opinion' cannot, thankfully, adjudicate the law.
Our legal system was designed to hold law breakers to account. I think that despite Republican Party and Federalist Society predations, our lower Federal courts seem to be serving justice, as instituted by the Constitution and defined by legal precedent.
The Supreme Court is a wild card.
Conservatives have put their cards on the table.
The Constitution only means what they divine 'original intent' to be. And while they may nod to specific legislation as 'established law' they have no respect for established laws they don't like. Kavanaugh recently played his hand by asserting a Supreme Court obligation to overturn 'bad law' seemingly unrelated to whether litigants have standing or the facts presented. Eek.
So yes, we have the apparatus to hold Jan 6 miscreants to account . But ultimately it is in the hands of their 'co conspirators'. I use that term loosely, but would very much like to know how conservative activists Ginni and Clarence Thomas may or may not appear in the record.
Hi Ned, While very interested is social issues and legal applications, lin may be able to suggest a few sources for you but not have the expertise you are looking for. Unfortunately, I am very rushed. I probably have not located the best sources for you, but see if any of those below are of interest.
https://guides.ll.georgetown.edu/c.php?g=316498&p=2114306
https://www.aclu.org/
https://www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/resources/civil-rights-organizations
http://www.startguide.org/orgs/orgs06.html
https://www.splcenter.org/
https://www.simplelegal.com/blog/top-in-house-legal-blogs-to-follow
The fact that absolutely no action has been taken to date suggests that this is a distinct possibility.
Lin, as you know the burden for criminal conviction is beyond a reasonable doubt. However juries are allowed to apply their common sense and perhaps many of the things you think are inadmissible may include evidence that is admissible. A back and forth on this evidence would require you to tell me what you think is inadmissible. That is an exercise which would require a good deal of discussion and probably beyond what would be reasonable to discuss herein.
And this is in context with the kidnapping and imprisonment of the Governor of Michigan, Gretchen Whitmer, by armed militia.
And the clandestine infiltration of trump minions into the riots in Portland who employed the most destruction/violence. All this was to be used by trump as justification for initiating his sought-after police-state punishment for those states/people who criticized/opposed him.
We saw it with our own eyes.
That event, for me, is etched on my brain as tremendously significant in showing how Trump and others were guilty of inaction—not standing up to this very disturbing revelation, not saying to our country that this type of behavior will not be tolerated. In fact, they tolerated it just fine. A sad moment for our country when leaders condone violence towards elected officials they don't like.
Trump was active - in the planning, and the promise to pardon people like
Paul Gosar. It’s much much worse than being inactive.
Hi Grace, yes I agree. I was referring to specific instances where he "acted by being inactive," like the Whitmer incident, or when he sat and watched the TV for hours during Jan. 6th rather than getting on the podium and denouncing what was happening.
"We love you!" he told them, tolerantly.
The Racist-in-Chief smiling upon his devoted racist followers and fans.
Well, that's the least he could do. Earlier on he'd said, "And I'll be with you." He must have meant "watching on TV". "In the spirit" might have been a bit too abstruse.
Exactly. Thank you, lin, for pulling these facts together. It's far from over.
2020?
2021
Thank you for this. So much to this that is in little pieces here and there. I hadn't heard that part about Walker seeing up a secret group to sidestep the Trump barriers. Wow. He should get a medal.
To be clear. Walker did not set up a secret group. That would have been entirely illegal and very worrying.
Walker secretly got his troops ready to respond by allowing them to gear up and be ready to go once deployment was allowed.
I haven’t noticed you before, Lin. If you are willing, please share a little more of your background because you are so convincing and persuasive that whether to trust you is an important issue for me. I use my full name, so you can easily find me if you’d prefer to do it directly. Thank you.
Thank You Deborah. I will try to link my sources more.
I am a CSpan Junkie. That is my primary source. Along with Washington Post , NYTimes, The New Yorker and my local paper. For my sins, I dip into Murdoch et al rags sometimes. I do not have television or wifi and do not participate in social media - other than this comments section. I've learned a lot from book reviews.
I am not an academic or journalist, but have had access to original sources and also done research for publications in peer reviewed journals.
I write Letters to the Editors, and sometimes people have tracked me down. Always positive, but still ... odd to me. So I use a pen name here.
Whew. Hope this is helpful. Although you have to decide whether it is trustworthy on its own merits.
That works for me as well. A shame that a response so informative and well made with footnotes no less becomes suspect in this electronic age with sofisticated ‘bots by foreign actors (unnamed but rhymes with Prussian). I too am not an academic, but as Ernestine the operator said (possibly before your time) “I am a high school graduate.” I was also a prolific Op-Ed letter writer in the 1980s & ‘90s before the WWW and after the mid ‘90s discovered that any quip made online or even a paper letter sent to a newspaper would end up posted online and easily found by search engines (I often Google my own name to see what’s there) I took a Web persona “Shale” for all my forum boards where I might make NSFW comments. Now, retired and old I don’t care and free to be out there. :)
Rob, Often, there are no footnotes accompanying lin's comments. Her writing is always assertive and, sometimes, to my mind a bit condescending in some of her replies. With such certainty, which can be rewarding to read, is it not proper to ask about her background? When I queried lin about her interest in subject she had inquired about, and to which I replied, I received no response from her. Sometimes personalities don't match and that is a common occurrence. lin has been outstanding in addressing issues and has attracted interest in knowing a bit more about her. lin was generously forthcoming. I don't see any of this problematic. You Rob, have made yourself known in many respects. I appreciate all of it. Cheers!
ROB, very well put. I am interested in everything you write, and I don't think Deborah was out of place for asking. Thanks for your disclosure as well!
Lin, I add my thanks for your disclosure. By my estimation, you have my trust in what you write. It comes from the heart and is worthy to read. Thanks as well to Deborah, for asking so kindly.
Finally, in these times, I respect anyone's reasons for remaining anonymous. I know that several folks do that as well, but I would never divulge who -- just consider yourself in very good company Lin. I use my real name, but don't consider that to be better than anyone else!
Gus, The questions to lin were not intended as a request for any personal and private information. Her very active participation, certitude and strongly expressed opinions attracted attention. I believe our inquires were based on curiosity about her expertise and very generally about her background. As you noted, questions and answer were welcome. Doubt was deleted.
Yes, that works for me! Thank you so much for letting us know. After all, our queries should only make it extra clear to you that you are in the right company here, eh? Excellent. And thanks for watching CSpan. Ugh and good for you!
I listen to CSpan radio. It is important to me to hear people in their own words and in context.
It can be a chore. But then, for instance, there is Rhode Island's Sheldon Whitehouse who has done the work to become a congressional expert on Dark Money in general and the courts in particular.
For some reason (old phone, erratic internet access?) I am having trouble pasting links. But here are a few.
https://www.c-span.org/networks/?channel=radio
https://billmoyers.com/story/look-for-power-in-the-shadows-watch-sheldon-whitehouse-shine-light-on-dark-money-operation-behind-gop-supreme-court-takeover/
https://harvardjol.com/archive/volume-57-number-2/
lin thank you so much for making the effort to share that information about yourself. I absolutely find your self-disclosure to be trustworthy. Honesty has a certain tone to it. A peaceful hum. Dishonesty likewise. A discordant sound. Your self-disclosure sounds completely trustworthy and honest to me, every word.
As long as you’re not Lin Wood:)
Lin, how did you gather all the URL’s w/o access to internet?
Never mind -wow using your phone! must be tortuous :-)
I'm curious as well, Deborah. lin, recently raised a question or two about journalism (if I remember correctly). After replying to her, I asked about her interest in journalism and her background without receiving a response. lin's certitude seems absolute and persistent. So, lin, care to share some more?
Me too. But how do we know Lin is “she”?
Why does anybody care?
Deborah, that is a wise precaution.
Thank you so much Deborah for this query. I have a history in this forum of investigating some of the players so I appreciate having company. 🙏🙏
Take 2: Please forgive my huffiness. Here is a much kinder, mellifluous rendition on the importance of accuracy, as articulated so well by Rebecca Skolnit interviewed by Heather. Beg, borrow, or steal your way to it--I encourage everyone to view it. Smell the roses, grow the roses, be a warrior for truth and critical thinking, be more than an individual, we are the river...it's so good, I listened to it again.
https://www.facebook.com/559835551/videos/3203517459932139/
Except you are not in the same company as Deborah. Instead of politely inviting a productive conversation, you made aggressive accusations that were false against 2 of your 3 targets, and with the 3rd, rather than follow the experience of others on how to neutralize trollers, you extolled your "investigation" without answering questions about your training, expertise, or identity.
March 2021. But yours is an excellent and much appreciated summary.
Wow, I cannot believe it. For once, Trump used accurate words to describe something his regime did - the way they dealt with the coronavirus was indeed "unprecedented and incredible." Unprecedented and incredibly BAD.
In case anyone wonders how frantic El Blobbo is, "Communist Democrats"???? I guess he did learn something from Tailgunner Joe's lawyer, Roy Cohn: when you run out of things to say, say "communist."
So much for the old dramatic rule that the antagonist must be the equal of the protagonist. These people make drooling morons look like geniuses.
No kidding. I don’t think any of us would’ve been surprised to see that letter addressed to “Representative Ray-Ban” or “Representative Raygun” or “Representative Ropeburn.”
Wait a minute, hold the phone, let me get this straight. Are you suggesting, seriously suggesting, that this group of accomplices to the would-be American dictator, and these attempted-coup-flameouts, are not members of the cream of the crop of American society? Boy that’s really blowing my mind, I don’t know if I can take that in. It’s late, I’m going to have to sleep on that revelation.
Roland, get some sleep. When you wake up you'll be able to view the situation with a clear head and a deeper appreciation for the many sacrifices they've made to Make America Great Again.
(/s just in case anyone has any doubts.)
Brilliant, Daria!
🙂🙃🤪
What color is your bucket, Daria?
Ha, ha, ha. Good one, Daria.
🤣😜
Meadows is the dumbest to come out of the NC woods in my lifetime, and I’m old.
I never heard my father swear or use foul language. My father would have called him a "dumb cluck". It took me decades to understand what my father was actually saying when he used that phrase.
So he used fowl language?
Cluck! Cluck! Cluck!
😆😆😆😆
Thank you, Daria and Ally. A much-needed burst of hilarity just issued from my lips. 😂😂
My mother would say "Oh Spit!". We both knew what she really meant.
And he brought in Madison Cawthorn, compounding the stupidity.
What is it with NC? The water? A wormhole to an alternate universe? Wait, wait. I got it. It's a vortex like up in Sedona.
Theys all got them bukits....
McCrory set the stage for the worms to come out of the woodwork
Hysterical! Thanks
Cream of the crop? I'm thinking more like cream of mushroom soup consistency of their cranial fill material./s
Is that where the drul comes from?
😂😂😂
Roland, when you wake up, it’ll all be just a bad dream....a VERY bad dream.
I wish. But you made me smile, thank you.
🙃
TC "El Blobbo" nice touch. When he gets issued his drool bucket, will it be orange?
I got me a blue bucket, does that make me a genus?
Gus, Well at least in the 'gifted' category.
Have you got a Latin surname?
It's so hard to remember what socialism is and what communism is! LOL He/they use the terms regardless, never getting either of them right!
TC, I thought the exact same thing. For once, there was truth in his word salad.
Yep!
Sorry about hijacking your thread, TC, I was cranky on reading HCR’s report after a long day of work. I went back to delete that post, not exactly my best ever, but already there were several replies, so I said “Phooey, what’s done is done” and let it ride.
Why be sorry? It was good!
Oh good. I was in quite the funky mood when I wrote that, so I was worried that it would come across the wrong way. Thanks for that feedback.
Well TC, you nailed it again. Tying McCarthy and Cohn together....I believe HCR is rubbing off on you! Thanks for another piece of the puzzle
Ah, you said it first! My comment came 5 hours later before I read yours.
gotta get up earlier, or go to bed later
Dear Heather,
I don't know how you do it, night after night! You didn't even give yourself a break this weekend! You are AMAZING!! Mere thanks do not convey my deep gratitude for your nightly commentaries.
Tonight's letter is another brilliant chronicle for the annals of history. Just as Herodotus is known as the very first chronicler of history, so, too, is Heather Cox Richardson, our preeminent chronicler of the 21st century -- and, at one of the most precarious and unsettling times in living memory.
Hear hear for Dr. Richardson! Another person diligently writing in these times is Jennifer Rubin of the Washington Post. She is fighting the good fight along with Dr. Richardson and we readers. Or wee readers; whichever the case may be.
I’m glad you included Jennifer Rubin in your comment. I have watch her evolution from a Red commentator to a nicely blue commentator for the last six years. Which ever her political bent, she is always thoughtful about her opinions, something I respect in people whether I agree with them or not. And, Boy Howdy! Can she shred anyone to their constituent parts when they richly deserve to be!
Nicely delivered, Rowshan.
Thank you, SL!
Hear, hear!
Thank you Heather for another fine consolidation of the facts which are being discovered by the Jan 6 committee, and the attempts to hide the information from the public. There is no question that there was a lot of involvement by members of congress and various appointed personnel. The corrupter in chief is hoping to hold out long enough to get a change in congress and end the committee. But if it serves it's purpose, there will be no second coming of Donald Trump, On a different aside, but something which has come to mind: do the religious right realize that the major tornado destruction occurred in the red states. Perhaps God is mad that they have abandoned their Christian teachings, How can they now blame climate change, after denying it for decades? And notice how quick our president was to offer aid to these very states that have been so outspoken about what a lousy national leader he is. I see him as a great, compassionate leader who will bend over backwards to assist Americans, regardless of their political persuasions, It really is time for the whole country to realize this, before democracy comes to a total end in America,
Eek. What has God got to do with any of this?
1) Kentucky voters elected a Democratic governor. And let's not lump all the 'red state' voters who vote for Democratic candidates with the Republican right wing religious extremists.
2) What the rest of us take as problems to be solved, such as climate disruption, pandemic disaster, and violent conflict - Republican right wing religious extremists take as signs and wonders, prophecies of the end days fulfilled. They prayer for Apocalypse Now, as though that were a good thing. Of course - they don't leave relief to religion, but demand government aid. Don't expect these GOP true believers to be rational or honorable - about religion or government.
To think that the fulfillment of a religious fantasy of end times and rapture is driving this destructive behavior chills me to the bone.
"Christian" version of the Taliban.
Then it must be pretty confusing for the God you are referring to in the case of a Red State with a Blue Governor. How very difficult it is to hear judgement day rhetoric when the people of my State are suffering.
Barbara, I don't think anyone here is claiming that Gd sent tornadoes to kill people wholesale. It's a tragedy. The mounting deaths of unvaccinated people from covid also are a tragedy, and those are largely inflicted by the political disinformation about vaccines..
If I understand him correctly, Charles is simply calling out those people who callously cheer on suffering of their opponents, calling it judgment from Gd, and then change their tune when troubles fall on them.
Sometimes the excuses claim to be religious, sometimes not. Rand Paul, for example, refused to vote for relief for other states when it was needed, but dropped all his justifications when it became his state that needs help. Morally, that actually puts him higher than the politicians who oppose public health measures even to keep their own people alive (Missouri AG, we see you.)
Barbara, if you know of local organizations providing relief to your fellow Kentuckians, please post here. Having just lived through an EF0 tornado ripping through my neighborhood with 65-85 mph winds, I can’t begin to imagine what that EF4 or 5 could and did do with upwards of 200mph winds-for more than 6 hours and a distance of 250 miles!! I don’t care what their politics are. Those folks need help. Does American Red Cross work in your region?
https://secure.kentucky.gov/formservices/Finance/WKYRelief This is the Kentucky site set up and approved by Governor Beshear.
Here is an update. From Governor Beshear this Monday morning. As of this morning, the Team Western Kentucky Tornado Relief Fund has received:
30,175 donations
$4,009,817.71 fund balance
Visit TeamWKYReliefFund.ky.gov
I think it unhelpful and near enough to incendiary to bring the tornado into the blue-red divide that drives so much of what is happening politically.
This was a tragedy of significant and frightening dimensions. We do not know the full extent of the death and destruction yet. Once again Nature has bared her fangs and we should be humble in response.
Certainly Kentucky and other states are generally Republican leaning. Certainly there are those who twist such events to suit a reset of religious convictions which seem to me to range from bizarre to abhorrent.
That does not lessen for one second the terror that Americans in that area of the US felt in the few seconds when they felt the full blast of the tornado. It doesn’t lessen the panic felt by those who were conscious and trapped after it had passed. It doesn’t lessen the grief that people who lost loved ones are feeling at this moment. It doesn’t lessen the compassion we should feel for those who have lost everything and have no clue what the next weeks and months will bring.
In today’s world, the above likely sounds sanctimonious to many of you. So be it. It’s been a hate-filled few years and any solutions to America’s problems will not spring from those who hate.
I’m all for “the fight” that’s going on now to bring to justice those who have carried America to the brink of being a failed democracy. I’m somewhat panicked at the extent to which this plot had legs. I’ve just finished reading the infamous PowerPoint and am galled at the impunity with which Meadows and others are behaving. I’m sure part of it is driven by what appears to be the pusillanimity and lethargy of the Department of Justice.
But the tornado didn’t give a shit about the curious politics of any of those whom it hammered. It is yet another reminder that climate change has given the dial that controls our weather events a vicious upward twist.
Finally, I do not wish to eviscerate you Charles Wax, who wrote that post. I have been brought to grief many times by the thoughtlessness of my own words to know full well the instinct from which yours came. I have a sense that many of us on this forum are getting angrier and more intemperate, no doubt due to the frustration we feel at the slowness of justice. We just need to maintain an understanding that all of us feel pain, regardless of political impulse. And every once in a while an event will occur which magnify some people’s pain a thousandfold. That calls for unmitigated compassion. We stand there today.
With that, I’m off my high horse. 🙄
Bravo. It is partisan hate that will destroy this Country. Putin has made sure of that.
It wasn't Putin's doing - the system was doomed at the outset by its own flaws. When you have a central government which is limited in its power and allows all powers it doesn't specifically claim for itself to be claimed by individual states, you have a loose association of semi-autonomous countries vying to control critical aspects of people's lives ranging from voting rights to contraception.
'high horse, indeed. '...by what appears to be the pusillanimity and lethargy of the Department of Justice'. Is there any credit to you for at least writing 'appears'? You do, indeed, not know if Attorney General, Garland, and the Department of Justice are guilty of 'pusillanimity' and 'lethargy', guilty of lack of courage or determination and a lack of energy and enthusiasm.; timidity! It's impressive to use the word 'pusillanimity' though. To quote you, Eric: 'I have been brought to grief many times by the thoughtlessness of my own words to know full well the instinct from which yours came.'
We are impatient, we are worried, we know so little about what DOJ doing or when whatever will be delivered. We're frightened and we need answers. Is the DOJ GUITLY? It doesn't look good. As for horses?
The DOJ is doing it right, and that does NOT happen over night.
BTW: Are you having fun yet Fern!!
I am actually in a hospital waiting room while my daughter is having (scheduled) surgery, and her surgical team is, from my professional RN view during her pre-op interview, that they are incredibly competent, professional, highly skilled, compassionate - and hysterically FUN & FUNNY! What a wonderfully happy, relaxed and confident patient they created! And mom.
Surgery Success!!
You're amazing, with an engine that purrs. I am hoping, you know what. Please post me when you know. Hand to heart.
💞💞
🪴
Fun; bah humbug!! I remember less and less about it!
I use words as they come to me Fern, each when they feel appropriate. Including ‘pusillanimity’.
I’ll not apologize for that.
And yes, ‘appears’ seemed appropriate. None of us can be certain what is happening in the that giant bureaucracy, the DOJ.
But if I (and many other ordinary citizens feel that way), then surely the other side is noticing with what apparent (wiggle word, again :) ease they can tie the forces of decency in knots. This is my worry.
Did you believe on February 1, 2021, after the euphoria of Biden’s inauguration had subsided, that at the end of 2021 Trump would not only have not been brought to legal account on at least some basis, he would effectively rule the Republican Party as a despot?
Did you believe on that long past date no significant actor in the insurrection would have been charged for a role in its planning?
Did you believe that NO legislative action would have been taken on behalf of Americans whose voting rights were being mercilessly shredded?
Did you believe that the Republicans would still be in the ascendancy enough to initiate the Christmas card fiasco after mass murder in a high school?
Did you believe that a legitimate investigation of January 1, working at full throttle, would be at the mercy of the DOJ to try to compel testimony from witnesses who asserted non-existent executive privilege?
Did you believe that two Senators would still be thumbing their noses at their own party without there having been some response in terms of the filibuster?
I care not if you pick apart any of those questions and demonstrate with citations how wrong I am to have expected action in a given area? My overriding point is that time moves on relentlessly towards a perilous deadline in November 22 and that Republicans, who should by all rights be having their “dark night of the soul”, are instead swaggering trolling, threatening, and plotting God knows what else. It’s ass backwards from what it should be.
We need action, beyond what the Select Committee is fighting to do. There are days when I could spit nails and this is one of them.
What I appreciate, Eric, is that you are speaking from the heart. You’re over there in Canada, not far away as the crow flies but in a very different country and milieu at this point in history, and your concern for the state of democracy in the USA is deep and sincere. I for one appreciate you very much.
Thank you for your response, Eric. I do not come to America's divide only with citations. You have pointed out before that my comments are often backed by links to my sources. In response, you may note that I pick the subjects and chose the sources. It is my experience in the civil rights and anti-war movements beginning in adolescence; work in tv broadcast as a associate producer in news, a producer and executive producer of public affairs programming and much else that enable me to find and select articles, studies, etc., of high caliber and to organize the material in a cogent way. That information is stitched with my considerations of the matter at hand. Generally, I am reluctant to pour my feelings over a comment, but naturally everything I do reflects feelings. I frequently comment using what has been stored in my mind, nothing more. In answer to the questions you posed, I would answer 'yes' to most of them. From my college major on, I have been a student of America's strengths and weakness. Frustration, disappointments, anger, commercialism, effort, advancement, inequality, comforts, beauty, waste and freedom, common to educated, middle-class and socially conscious Americans have been mine. While believing this country was headed for big trouble, did I expect this, not quite. I responded to your use of 'pusillanimity' and 'lethargy' with feeling. I simply do not believe that Garland and the DOJ guilty of lack of courage or determination or a lack of energy and enthusiasm. It revolted me to read that. I am deeply disturbed at the seeming slowness of the DOJ to take necessary actions and I look for analysis from those who know the USA's rule of law. Lawrence Tribe, one of Garland's teachers, appears to be full of discontent. I need to know more. Accusations without substance/evidence as I see it can rile me up.
Well said. Again, we are not that far apart.
I have said recently, so this will not be new, that I deeply fear that the hold Trump and his followers have on the country is based often on intimidation. This is tremendously concerning, as it could one sorrowful day be the tipping point taking control away from the people.
This was part of Trump’s schtick from the get go. From the safety of his heavily guarded podium, he abused journalists, mocking one by imitating his disability. He talked about the “good old days” when police were “not as gentle as they are now” in maintaining crowd control. He was contemptuous of McCain for being imprisoned in Vietnam.
There is a certain kind of person, most often lacking in stature and power in his own life, to whom this is pure catnip. They jumped on his bandwagon and have competed to be the toughest of his legion. They talked tough in their corner of the country for years, and then many assembled on January 6. Together they became a rabble and acted out their power fantasies. Many were doing it for an audience of one.
Now this sort of brazen, violence-threatening intimidation is spreading. Election workers are quitting in droves because they fear for their lives if they work in 2022 and 2024. Politicians are quitting. The field is being left open to the Trump lickspittles and a shrinking number who amazingly refuse to be cowed.
Getting death threats is no joke. I am sure that many people have had dozens of sleepless nights, trying to convince themselves that the threat they received was spat out in anger and not to be taken seriously.
Having people show up on your street, perhaps at your door to hurl invective must be terrifying. That is happening.
All of it is of a piece. There is a portion of the Trump crowd who see themselves as brave and even heroic in committing such offenses.
My fear is this. Has some form of intimidation weakened key American legal institutions? It would be odd if there were not prosecutors who were not thinking uneasy thoughts as they pursue Trump legally. They must at least have some sense that their life would be in high danger the moment Trump was charged. The same goes for prosecutors who would bring a case against Gosar or Boebert or any of the others who seem to have given material assistance to the insurrectionists.
I do know that there are plenty of American heroes - there is no other word - who take the invective and threats and work doggedly on.
But I am beginning to fear that cases involving Trump or anyone very close to him are being slow-walked. The logic will be that you get only one chance to chop the head off the snake…
But there may be personal fear involved. There may also be institutional fear - people who are leery to take Trump on directly because it would incite mass violence.
And I have no citations for this. Just a lot of concern that is coalescing into suspicion as days and months go by in the face of an inexorably ticking clock.
Occasionally, when facing horrible circumstances beyond our personal experience, we seek to learn and act as necessary. Life has changed and situation could become completely catastrophic. Once recognizing the circumstances, emotion runneth over as terror takes hold for some. With others, ego and emotion runneth over. It is difficult to keep thinking and acting beyond venting emotions while not ignoring them. In a way or two we may be further apart than you think.
"Perhaps God is mad that they have abandoned their Christian teachings."
GOD is Love and only Love.
...the sun shines on every person in the same way as does the rain.
We are the ones who assign GOD into our self-conceived box because of our inability to fully comprehend the undeserved blessing of HIS unlimited Love for each one of us.
Thank you, George.
Professor,
Thank you for codifying this week’s political pathos into bite sized pieces.
In my Spring, there was Kennedy getting shot in Texas. Civil Rughts and Vietnam seethed. Now, in my early Fall, we’re in crisis over Trump, a grifter who would turn our Constitution on its head for a dime. He is shameless in his hurry to burn down the house.
It’s defeating to dwell on this any more tonight. But, again, thank you. Your letters frame the first draft of our week’s prequel. You help our wingspan updraft over warm currents.
Sincerely,
Patty
My time frame as well. Except that winter is upon me.
Winter here too. Damn I have to find a way to fight this!
Ma bones is cold too. Git you a drul bukit wif a heater.
You gave me goosebumps.
fortunately, I am still my doctor's "most boring patient."
As I have pointed out here a couple of times. I was stationed at LeJeune in 70-71 with 4th Bn 10th Marines. We as well 82nd Airborne were as 82nd Airborne were trained in riot control in case of rioters in Washington DC attacking the Capitol. They would have Chinook-ed us up to DC and trucked supplies in Six-bys following our departure. This was the plan as decided by Washington DC.
Perhaps, this was initiated by the Secretary of Defense?
That the opposite, using the National Guard, was prescribed for rioters attacking the Capitol and Congress is astounding. Our contingent had no live rounds with the exception of sharpshooters. And that prior heads of the Department of Defense were worried about Federal troops is laughable. The National Guard is controlled by state governors who apparently believe politics surpass their oaths of office to the state and federal government.
People fear the military. It is the politicians we need to fear.
Using Federal troops to defend the Capitol is not the issue. The issue is the Constitution does not appear to consider a rogue President who would be King as supported by various political congressional, senatorial, and politically appointed actors. In passing, how would you react to meeting one who supported the overthrow of our nation?
The next in command and in line to trump, Pence, knew this was going to take place and did nothing to warn others or take action to prevent it. He allowed the attack take place. He is just as complicit in his nonactions to overthrow the US government. Still trying to place innocent, the coward.
Military officers swear an oath to defend the Constitution;
" 'I' do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter"
It does not say allegiance to the President. It says to the Constitution. It also says defend against domestic threats. Others and legal minds may differ with my opinion or reading. However, and in my opinion, the Flynn brothers need to be chased to the equivalent of the Brig in the Army, court-martialed and stripped of rank and military privileges.
There is more to this than what has been put forth. We need to examine where the system has failed us leading up to this "One Day in January."
Rant over and taking a breather . . .
"People fear the military. It is the politicians we need to fear.
"Using Federal troops to defend the Capitol is not the issue. The issue is the Constitution does not appear to consider a rogue President who would be King as supported by various political congressional, senatorial, and politically appointed actors. In passing, how would you react to meeting one who supported the overthrow of our nation?"
Thank you for this. It is what I have thought over and over...the framers of the Constitution never in a million years ever could have imagined an giant orange man-baby would be trying to stage a coup, AND be supported by a network of governmental entities in that take-over. How does one make provisions for that? As you said, the system doesn't exactly spell out how to counter and deal with something like this. Federal troops? National Guard? Who's in charge in such a scenario? Yes, we really do need to examine where there are problems in the chains-of-command, ESPECIALLY if a sitting President* is the one actually instigating--even tacitly--a coup. I hope a lot of this can "come out in the wash", as they say.
You wrote: "However, and in my opinion, the Flynn brothers need to be chased to the equivalent of the Brig in the Army, court-martialed and stripped of rank and military privileges."
AMEN!!!
Alas, our Constitution appears to have a new amendment: freedom to interpret (without understanding or regard for others). This leaves the question of whether some sworn to defend our Constitution are defending the document or an interpretation. The current SCOTUS majority and too many other state and federal courts and judges aren’t helping.
It is almost as if truth responds in a scientific way, much like warm air rising. You can try and put a lid on it, but it persists in blowing the lid off. Thank you Professor and to this fine community of readers and writers. Namaste 🙏
Dear Dr. R, another clearly written, concise letter of facts. What the former President and his henchmen and minions did stuns me every time I read this. No rule of law for them unless they made it up. No working for our country but against it, all for power and money. Justice must prevail, it just must. You wrote all through the weekend and we thank you. Please, please take care of yourself!
Let’s hear it for the Congressional Research Service and aides for an incredible reconstruction of events, and Professor Richardson for such a lucid narrative! Heres hoping the bad actors will cave in soon under pressure, and that the former Trump administration will have its “ John Dean moment,” albeit belatedly.
I was just talking yesterday with a family member about John Dean - I like your phrasing of a "John Dean moment." Here's hoping we have one with this insurrection. Agree wholeheartedly on your praise of Professor Richardson's work here!
I have to ask again, and to echo the Professor's point: What must be in the materials that Meadows is refusing to turn over? Wow.............
I would start by looking at the encrypted phone calls, and why was he using a system like that, when the WH had a system in place to keep track of all communications in order to be able to make them available to scholars in the future. Surely our intelligence community is capable of deciphering whatever he was trying to hide.
Failure to obey the requirement that he turn over all communications. That there is content there that he does not want revealed even after all he has released is quite a piece of information.
Marital infidelity + treason?
Haha, right..."the usual."
So—the stunning question forming in my head—maybe we need to be thankful that the guard was held back!? Until it was clear whom they would support...?
I feel so nauseated at the thought there could have been any doubt...
Army mom here, so I'm biased, but I wonder if the delay was the coup plotters couldn't count on the National Guard to back THEM against the people? I think the DC National Guard was begging for approval to help the Capitol Police and the DC Metropolitan Police and were hella frustrated to be told to hold and wait for the Pentagon to approve
Looks like it to me, and my only connection to the Army is my dad's service in the Army Air Force in WWII. It was weird when then-Pres Tramp (no insult intended to anyone else) replaced so many Pentagon people with personal servants right after the election. The coup plotters couldn't count on any military to back them against the Constitution, so the plan was to keep the Army and the Guard out of the way while their thugs did damage.
Yes, this - the whole "move Kash Patel to the Pentagon" story is going to be interesting to learn (he apparently spent time with the Jan. 6 Committee recently). My uncle also served in the Army Air Corps in WWII - respect to your Dad
My Dad was there as well. SSgt USAAC.
Old Army guy here. Yep.
Appreciate you and your service, Charlie - thank you!
I will remain a skeptic regarding the power of The Select Committee until I see someone in handcuffs.
The committee’s job is incredibly focused and important: to uncover the truth. We, the public, are supposed to be active participants in caring about facts and maintaining justice.
They can’t do our job. But they aren’t giving up on us. They are doing brilliant work in hope the public come through.
We cannot lay the blame at their feet. It’s up to us to take up oxygen with truth, push back against propaganda and hold media accountable.
Your final sentence says it all. We must continue to speak truth and hold the media to those truths.
Truth, S. Mikelle, TRUTH. Thank you.
Brilliant
Loved the John Mitchell pic, also loved Martha Mitchell and her raving... May another Martha surface and raise hell.
Opportunity for ACTION as this unfolds…
“Also, action is needed now before we “vote strategically.” Whatever is in your comfort zone, please support candidates/ incumbents fighting the good fight.
Here’s a great place to start looking for candidates to support.” (Kathy, thanks for your words.)
http://lenspoliticalnotes.com/
The current Note focuses on Governors’ races. It includes information on Democratic Incumbents and candidates to flip Republican governors.
https://lenspoliticalnotes.com/political-note-432-stacey-abrams-governor-georgia/
Thank you, Jan ! I know they can use “ boots on the ground” . Small donations also help build campaigns. Val Demings is gaining on Rubio in Fl( with all his Repub dark $$$)
Her average donation is under $30. Go,Val !!!!
Val is on my list, for sure!
We depend so much on your clear presentation of FACTS.
Time to move forward with contempt of Congress charges. Now is NOT a time for mercy.
The three branches of government have run off the rails. The GOP has been hijacked.
The Supreme Court has been packed with Trump loyalists and its refusal to uphold Constitutional rights (in my opinion) make it illegitimate.
Since Trump and his followers are determined to burn the entire institution down,
I can only hope it is a phoenix that will arise anew from the ashes.
Nice thought..."phoenix that will arise anew from the ashes."
Another great timeline of compact, clear information. Many, many thanks.
I don't know how many hours a day you are working Dr. Richardson, or how much support and help you have in assembling this information, or how much time "off" you have.
But, as a person who started working long hours around 12 years old and did so until I was outsourced at age 60, I can say: It is not healthy for you or your local people to work too many hours no matter how important you (or anyone) perceives that work to be.
Do give an eye to your health and well being. I do kindly recommend taking time away from whatever maelstrom you might have entered and do so often. It will be great to have your writing around over the long term.
Working all the time is definitely a health compromising approach to this walk through "life".
Being healthy tomorrow is just as important as what happens with these rich guys today, who are very likely going to get away with all that stuff they did on January 6th anyway.
I’m getting the impression that Prof. Heather is invigorated by her work and does not let it tire her…that’s what happens when you do what you love, and love what you do! She seems to find a balance and lives in a beautiful place that gives her peace and some measure of contentment
I am only guessing here. But this research and writing likely is part of her full time job at BC. Professors do lots more than just teach, and research and writing is a large part of that. They have discretion over what they choose to research. I don’t know if she’s teaching this semester, or how many classes if so, but I’ll just hazard a guess that all of this work falls squarely under her role as professor.
I suspect (nay, hope) that much of her research is leading to the authoritative narrative of the years of Cult 45.
Not to diminish her work! This is a massive project, and I am sure, exhausting.
She did teach this semester, she mentioned in her fb chat that classes had ended