54 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
Mark Shields's avatar

so we know this, over and over!

so, what's the next step, after saying all this, over and over?

Biden's last hurrah should be to exploit the SC's unfortunate ruling about presidential immunity, ASAP.

Release the Jack Smith summary.

Extradite the J6 convicts to blue state prisons where possible.

But that's window dressing -

Could it make a diff., to take some sufficient justified (Mueller report, J6 report, convictions, improperly dismissed crimes) executive action against the felon, with the objective to save the nation from a fatal error - a RESET, perhaps by identifying this 'bought' & sold election as such, and calling for a new special election, paper ballots, or whatever, in Nov 2025... with NO PAC, SuperPAC, dark money, or donations over $20K; and with a full CIA press on billionaire and foreign state misinfo via internet apps and algorithms (& a fresh slate of candidates from both parties.)

Basic principle: you can't have both billionaires and a democracy.

This case needs to be made clearly to the American people. Unfortunately, Biden can't.

America needs someone verbal, knowledgeable, fearless. Mitt Romney/Liz Cheney, and Adam Schiff/Jaime Ruskin?

Expand full comment
Marlene Lerner-Bigley (CA)'s avatar

As i understand it, Garland is releasing Smith’s report prior to the 20th. Because Aileen Cannon denied Smith’s case and recently is trying to stop his report from being released, Garland has asked the 11th Court of Appeals to grant him the right to release Volume 1 before the 20th. The 11th Court has already reprimanded Cannon twice so we will see if they kiss trump’s ring or not.

Expand full comment
Mark Shields's avatar

Just volume 1?

Garland, go home already!!

Expand full comment
MLRGRMI's avatar

I absolutely agree with you, Mark Shields, that “you can’t have both billionaires and democracy”. But no matter how many times, and who our messenger is about this, it gets met with “Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil” monkey actions. Most people have to learn the hard way. The pissy thing is they drag us down with them. WE are the only messengers we can rely on. WE are the only ones who can steadfastly refuse to buy in to the worship of the Golden Calf. WE are asked to accept the baton and create -in the midst of chaos,- shelters for sanity, for learning, for strategizing how to build from the tools available to us, a functioning society. New-Deal-Americanism is in the crosshairs facing the firing squad. How we chose to go forward defines our character as human beings. Today President Jimmy Carter is laid to rest. He set a pretty good example for character and service. But no one promises you a prize at the end. Because it’s about more than US and OUR present moment. Together we can build a bridge to a future where we did not “Obey in Advance”. I don’t know what it will look like there. But it will more likely be better for our positive involvement and actions.

Expand full comment
Rick Sender's avatar

I don’t know Soros doesn’t bother you Bloomberg doesn’t bother you up until now. Bezos didn’t bother you Zuckerberg doesn’t bother you. Gate doesn’t bother you buffet doesn’t bother you.

Here’s a little quote I’m gonna give you. You shouldn’t worry about billionaires becoming politicians. You should be worried about middle of the road average citizens becoming legislators in Washington DC and on a minimal government salary becoming multimillionaires years later

Expand full comment
Dick Montagne's avatar

Dream on, I don’t know how Joe can watch this slow motion train wreck and not put a permanent stop to it. 🤷‍♂️🤬

Expand full comment
Rowshan Nemazee's avatar

We’re not that democratic, are we? A little pie-in-the-sky, perhaps?

Expand full comment
Mark Shields's avatar

We have NOT been democratic as a nation since Reagan gave money the vote; it has deteriorated ever since Carter left office (as the result of Reagan's treasonous deal with the Iranian hostage holders).

Well, I'm certainly NOT in favor of bringing a vote to a dollar fight, with apologies to Indiana Jones.

To have a democracy, you first have to fix misinformation. (And NO, one doesn't fix misinfo with just more of it.)

To fix misinformation you have to defund, deny, depose the billionaire class.

Expand full comment
J L Graham's avatar

Money altering, when not determining, political outcomes is, was and always will be (a good old fashioned word) "corruption". So are some of the jaw-dropping conflicts of interest we have folded into our current concept of normalcy. Money has always weighed corruptingly on the "scales" of justice, and social justice has continued in some respects, to the current day, but since decades of progress against political corruption has been on a roll ever since sleazy Reagan successfully smeared government of, by and for the people. I think many opportunities missed to launch a public movement against the power of money over politics, but whatever, we surely must focus on it now. How many problems are caused or worsened, and remain seemingly irremediable because concentrated money is in the way.

Here is just one wrinkle of that that came to my attention yesterday. From time to time I see an article warning of the growing death toll of multiply antibiotic resistant bacteria. Every such article explains our lack of progress (for decades) the same way:

“We’ve had no new classes of antibiotics come into routine use since the late 80s and the market model that would promote the creation of new ones is broken. If you develop a new antibiotic, it might be used by someone for a weekly course once a year. Where’s the profit in that?”

“By contrast, blood pressure drugs that have to be taken every day, or cancer drugs that have to be administered for months, offer pharmaceuticals far greater profits. So there is no incentive for them to try to develop new antibiotics. It is a real headache.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/jan/05/antibiotic-emergency-could-claim-40-million-lives-in-next-25-years

So we all wait for "The Invisible Hand" to reach out and save us from a potentially deadly epidemic? I'm not seeing it. It not that we could not be doing better, but big moneyed interests are getting in way, either by omission, or warping or stopping legislation when we seek our own remedy.

Expand full comment
JDinTX's avatar

I was recently prescribed a drug that cost almost $800 for three months. It made me nauseous and I asked for a different drug. Another one for the same thing cost $5.00. I am still gobsmacked. I feel the vultures are overseeing our health care.

Expand full comment
Gail Adams VA/FL's avatar

Similar experience here. Script was $900+. Good rx coupon was $46. Crazy. Today I pick up a $8500 script. We’ll see how the $2000 cap works. If no go, back to hospital infusions which Medicare covers. The same drug (Enbrel) that the pharmaceutical company provided almost free for 12 years. What a racket.

Expand full comment
JDinTX's avatar

Racket describes it best. I had no idea til this last insanity.

Expand full comment
J L Graham's avatar

Monopolies are a form of extortion. Control the market for things that people need or want and name your price. My local paper ran a story on how a local surgeon who was "performing" several operations at once became the hero of hospital bean counters. The downside was poorer patient outcomes. That's the choice point we are facing, and since Reagan, the bean counters usually win.

One of the extortion rackets is what has become of patents. Patents, or something like them can serve the needs of both innovators and society because ostensibly, we make the rules. Yet the rules have steadily become more one-sided and abusive as an engine of monopolies. There is plenty of room to rethink and reevaluate policies that should serve everyone. Government of the people, by the people, for the people don'cha know?

Expand full comment
Gail Adams VA/FL's avatar

On point. Thanks

Expand full comment
JDinTX's avatar

And so it should be. Extortion racket seems to nail what I have been through lately.

Expand full comment
Miselle's avatar

I don't have many prescriptions, but before I hit Medicare, a friend told me about Good Rx. I have no idea how they manage to get the prices so low, and I do realize they don't apply it to your insurance, but still! I had a topical ointment that would have cost $100 through insurance and was $27 using the Good RX.

Expand full comment
J L Graham's avatar

I too found a source of a drug cheaper out of pocket than though my very expensive insurance through Good Rx.

Expand full comment
Gail Adams VA/FL's avatar

I don’t get it. I suppose big pharma viewed Medicare as a cash cow.

Expand full comment
J L Graham's avatar

You betcha. That's why Republicans prohibited Medicare from negotiating price. They capture power for plutocrats.

Expand full comment
JDinTX's avatar

“Republicans” is synonymous with vulture. As HST said, they oppose anything that helps the average American. It’s been going on for a long time.

Expand full comment
JDinTX's avatar

Thank you for this. I signed up for Mark Cuban’s drug plan but they don’t have any of mine at present. Maybe I’ll try Good RX

Expand full comment
Kathy Hughes's avatar

We are far from the days when Alexander Fleming, who discovered insulin to treat diabetes, sold the patent for a token $1 since he wanted the drug to be available to all. We should have a nonprofit research center working to develop new antibiotics, antiparasitics, and antivirals. The current system is not working and we are broke.

Expand full comment
J L Graham's avatar

Fleming's perspicacity gave us penicillin, but yes, there a cases when breakthrough discoveries were donated to the common good. In recent decades, Congress reversed the policy that considered public university research public domain, and that opened a whole can of worms for both universities and the common weal.

Expand full comment
Mark Shields's avatar

I took a great macro econ class from the author of Prices and Choices in 1986 or -7 at HSPH, and he said, and I will always remember this formulation, that the benefits of Adam Smith's 'invisible hand' of a free market have just 3 simple pre-requisites. The simple requirements EVERY American defender of a free market should know, inside out, are:

1) product choices (a variety of competing products in a niche)

2) informed consumers (who know key distinguishing attributes of the products), and

3) consumers acting rationally in their own best interest.

These conditions don't need to be perfect, just substantially the case.

However, these 3 things are the absolute LAST THING that any typical, self-serving laissez-faire capitalist wants.

US CAPITALISM FIGHTS the existence of a true free market, tooth and nail:

1) it seeks monopoly (and proprietary horizontal & vertical integration) at every opportunity and in every niche, and failing that, colludes on price, and failing both, commits fraud (disinformation, disinfotainment), to PREVENT actual product choice competition. A fair market is an unstable condition that strongly tends toward monopoly. One cannot obtain, nor keep a free market without a responsive and strong regulatory regime in governance. US Corporations are required both by law and stockholders to maximize their profits, and do so to the best of their ability. They will attempt to buy congress and law, capture regulators, increase in size, influence judges, and misinform the press & public, and therefore...

2) it invests in enormous advertising budgets, sufficient to sell refrigerators to Eskimos, or in Steve Bannon's phrase 'fill the channel with shit' or in Plato's phrase, 'to make the worse appear the better cause' (this last was part of the City of Athens' 'trumped' up indictment of Socrates - perhaps we should make hemlock available to the billionaires, CEO's, and presidents who ACTUALLY do this?). US Capitalism abhors an informed consumer! Even major corporations with a popular product (winning in a free market is never assurance one will continue to win) will pull out all stops (&undercut all regulations) to misinform! (Correct information IS fungible power, and leaving power with the consumer is an anathema to 'proper' self-interested corporations.)

3) it uses said misinformation in a cynical manner to trigger EMOTIVE human choices in domains where consumer choice does still exist. It overtly uses sex ('sex sells'), fear, appetite, addiction, love, even humor, and increasingly AI-targeted & individually informed misinformation, to steer the non-rational behaviors of those they have observed to have responded in desired ways in the past (via the Attention & Surveillance Capitalism Economy - to which we all have clicked "I Agree").

One only needs to see the growing misanthropy, objectification, obesity, addictions, amoral transactionalism, social isolation, dishonesty, and distrust in American society, to understand US Capitalism is playing what Simon Sinek calls a 'Finite strategy in an Infinite Game'. We are 'misinformation-marks'; we are rarely rational consumers. This extraction via misinformation does not scale as a civilization. There will be no winners here. This does not get prettier with greater consolidation of power.

o To summarize, US Capitalism exists in direct conflict with free markets.

o The capacity to control a market is related to the size of a corporation.

o Democracy and good governance can't co-exist with a billionaire class.

IF one has the money to buy / own information streams that half the nation consumes, or if one can buy 3/4 of congress with petty cash, one can always 'win', without risking free market competition on merit.

This is the kind of world that the kind of person who needs to be a billionaire, needs to have, and in my view increasingly does have.

Again, democracy, free markets, and billionaires are incompatible.

Expand full comment
J L Graham's avatar

Exactly, and I was aware that I risked defaming Adam Smith by using what was originally his metaphor; although I think it was an unfortunate one as it seems to ascribe a benign purpose to what is instead a strategy of balance. Russian communists thought the could change human nature. The USSR even tried to push a phony theory of genetics (Lyesekoism) to reinforce that belief. The "right" believes that selfishness alone can deliver us to the promised land. Smith grasped that competition CAN serve as a regulator, but in a free market (in a free society) worthy of the name. "Freedom" to bully, freedom to monopolize is the opposite of that.

Expand full comment
Mark Shields's avatar

Remember a brief treatment of Lysenkoism when I studied genetics in the early-mid 70's.

Appreciate your distinction of types of freedom, very much along the lines of Jefferson Cowie's recent Pulitzer winning history, 'Freedom's Dominion', where he traces two disparate and conflicting uses of the concept of freedom to (as I recall) before the founding of the Union. One notion was the freedom of thought and religious belief and to 'the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness', the other being the freedom to dominate others (women, native Americans, slaves, the poor) without interference from government authority.

Both those notions of freedom continue to characterize American life and internal conflict. Seems this disparity needs to be addressed in the education of the youth for a couple generations to fully extirpate it, since the belief is culturally transmitted. Both parties agree on this point, just don't agree which freedom should define America's future.

Expand full comment
J L Graham's avatar

Alas it appears to me that we are increasingly allowing others, and commercial media in particular, to define what our nation's culture is. It's sidewalk level and collaborative or it isn't really ours.

Expand full comment
Mark Shields's avatar

Exactly so. Fair markets are great, but unstable, and cease to exist without regulation sufficient to assure a level playing field of competition. This sufficient government regulation ceases to exist when business 'regulatees' become large enough to capture the 'regulators'. Most large US Corporations are substantially unregulated with regards to preserving 'level playing field' markets, and today, at best, regulation barely serves to preserve public safety and national security. And in the case of Musk, is failing at both.

Expand full comment
Mark Shields's avatar

You are not by any chance the John Graham who attended Plainsboro elementary in the 60's? A Rocket man? McGraw-Hill fan?

Expand full comment
J L Graham's avatar

No, I'm older than that. I thought rockets were cool though.

Expand full comment
Mark Shields's avatar

Would love to catch up with him. That was Plainsboro, NJ, a bit outside Princeton. At the time I was friends with John, it was a one stop town (a few miles from Orson Wells' Millstone Pond setting for the radio version of H.G.Wells' War of the Worlds). John's home was in Cranberry, a couple miles east - no relative that you know?

Expand full comment
J L Graham's avatar

Not that I know. War of the Worlds was cool too.

Expand full comment
T. Richardson's avatar

To be fair, Kissinger also made a disastrous deal to delay the end of the Vietnam War to help Nixon’s reelection. Republicans have a history of putting their power above the good of the country.

Expand full comment
Sharon's avatar

Just like the current border “crisis”. Republicans don’t care about immigration except to fear monger and get votes.

Expand full comment
J L Graham's avatar

I never saw a price tag for Trump dispatching thousands of troops to the border as a political stunt. Republicans get to do things like that.

Expand full comment
J L Graham's avatar

And decency. When Democrats shed their most openly racist wing, Repubs assumed the lease. A "deal with the devil" if there ever was one.

Expand full comment
Rick Sender's avatar

Well I wouldn’t call that Republicans, but I certainly would agree with that having to do with Nixon by the way who was recently rated by Gallup the worst president in history. But you won’t be happy, but who is rated the second worst and believe it or not it wasn’t Jimmy Carter. It was your own Joe Biden. By Gallup.

Expand full comment
JDinTX's avatar

Spot on

Expand full comment
Rick Sender's avatar

Hey Mark, if Reagan gave money, the vote and Kamala Harris’s output, Trump three to one and spent $2 billion on our campaign. Why did she lose?

Expand full comment
Rick Sender's avatar

And frankly, I think Heather needs to apologize because for her to talk about this tragedy and blame Trump for making a comment why is she making a comment about Trump?

He has nothing to do with the fires in California talk to the governor and mayor who are responsible for this tragedy in large part. In fact, if you read my post above, the mayor nicely cut $17 million from the firefighting budget to pay for homeless. You’re happy now?

Expand full comment
Susan Guare's avatar

Your comment is disingenuous. HCR isn't blaming any person for the fires, but she IS calling out falsehoods and that's her job.

Expand full comment
Rick Sender's avatar

Susan, what she did was exactly what she blamed Trump for doing she blamed Trump for blaming Newsome and she was blaming Trump for that but the problem is that Trump was correct. Maybe the timing I would agree was not the best but it should’ve been set a long time ago and I’m gonna send you a couple of articles here talking about exactly what I’ve been saying. They didn’t prepare. They didn’t plan everybody who lives in the west side of LA knows it and here’s some commentary about it and saving the fish was more important than saving the community.

Expand full comment
Ann W's avatar

Because she--and we--are sick and tired of Trump's lies, lies, and more lies, and his "everything is about me, me, me" rhetoric.

Expand full comment
Rick Sender's avatar

Not only is there a problem with water reclamation there is a passage of a bill for 2.7 million to build a huge Reservoir back in 2014 and it’s still not built a huge reservoir.

Not to mention when I talk about California and here people love to talk about infrastructure not knowing anything about California doesn’t help you so let me inform you a bit

There was $33 billion allocated in 2014 I believe to build a high-speed rail from San Francisco to Los Angeles, which as of this year hasn’t even gotten started and now the estimate is $88 billion.

Expand full comment
Rick Sender's avatar

Really well guess what the comedy made about the California government not being prepared has nothing to do with him. It has to do with the fact that he was correct. Period. This happens every single year sometimes more than others and California politicians which basically has been a in control of the Democrats for four decades. Let this happen.

Expand full comment
Rick Sender's avatar

Sorry, not comedy ..comment he made. But I guess you’re OK with Biden’s lies. Anybody’s lies had nothing to do with the fire disaster that’s happening right now. The only thing that was a cause of that not the cause but the cause of the severe devastation was the lack of preparedness. And lack of budget, addressing the issue, which happens every single some years is worse than others

Expand full comment
Marian Pink's avatar

the heat, the lack of rain for many months, the winds: the governor caused all that?

Expand full comment
Rick Sender's avatar

Marion, this is not a new issue it’s been happening for decades. And yes, when you let millions of gallons of water flow into the ocean instead of saving it to use for mitigation that’s correct. That’s the politician’s decision and that had to do with saving the smelt and other “” miscellaneous environmental concerns, which did nothing for the living human being, nor the farmland that they destroyed by not putting up the damn or two . So now you’ve got $50 billion worth of damage because you wanted to save a few fish.

If you lived in California for any parade of time, you would know that that’s been the situation not to mention Marion that the mayor of Los Angeles just cut $17 million from the firefighters budget to be able to provide for the illegal immigrants for food, shelter and medical care

So now you be the judge

Not just the governor, the entire Congress in the state of California

If you had followed California fires, you’d realize that every 40 every 2 to 4 years not only to have these kind of fires they don’t do sufficient brush mitigation. They don’t use burn area Mation and they’ve always calling other states to help them with a problem. what does that indicate to you? They’re always asking for help from other states.

Expand full comment
Rick Sender's avatar

Former "Dancing with the Stars" professional dancer Valentin Chmerkovskiy aired grievances on social media Wednesday, writing, "5th largest economy on the planet. Firefighters didn't have enough water pressure to do their jobs?! Are you joking me?! The taxes we pay for 3rd world infrastructure is unbelievable?! Come on."

Sara Foster wrote on X, We pay the highest taxes in California. Our fire hydrants were empty. Our vegetation was overgrown, brush not cleared. Our reservoirs were emptied by our governor because tribal leaders wanted to save fish. Our fire department budget was cut by our mayor. But thank god drug addicts are getting their drug kits. @MayorOfLA @GavinNewsom RESIGN. Your far left policies have ruined our state. And also our party."

Celebrity fitness trainer Jillian Michaels remembered losing her home in the 2018 Woolsey Fire as she took to X to criticize California's leadership.

"5th largest economy on the planet. Firefighters didn't have enough water pressure to do their jobs?! Are you joking me?! The taxes we pay for 3rd world infrastructure is unbelievable?!"

Expand full comment
Derek Smith's avatar

🙄

Expand full comment
CyberFascist's avatar

You must have skipped paragraph five. Reading comprehension is important, particularly if you spout opinions based on a misread. It’s OK to re-read and acknowledge and maybe even retract your post.

Expand full comment
Rick Sender's avatar

Wait a minute were you Mrs. Manny my 12th grade English teacher. ?

Or the professor that graded my thesis?

Content over form, my fascist friend. I post a lot and I don’t have time to deal with minutia. If you wanna give me a C minus or a D no problem content, content content content. How about acknowledging what that said?

Expand full comment
E Sonoma's avatar

Biden isn’t built like that, he’s a traditional institutionalist. There’s probably lots he can do but won’t. Unfortunately

Expand full comment