alternet--2020-11-26--Trump's delusions and conspiracies are one aspect of a distinctive American bias against reality

On this holiday , millions of Americans are gathering around a homemade feast of comfort food , basking in the warmth of familial love and giving each other a potentially life-threatening virus .
One week ago , Erin Burnett asked during the lead segment of her nightly talk show on CNN , `` The CDC is warning Americans not to travel or gather in large groups for Thanksgiving .
Will they listen ? ''
Any fool could have answered the question : No .
Millions of travelers have moved through the airports to greet their loved ones , perhaps with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coughing in each other 's faces .
One can not help but wonder how many families will share napkins as they debate the efficacy of masks as protection against COVID-19 .
A pandemic is dangerous , frightening and chaotic enough in the best circumstances .
Throw in a population given to superstition , hatred of experts as diabolical elites and hostility toward science , and reasons to give thanks — other than the ability to breathe without the aid of a ventilator — will rapidly diminish .
The farcical spectacle of ostensible adults @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and indulging in megaphone-mad conspiracy theories while their neighbors die would invite howls of laughter , if it were n't so tragic .
Far surpassing the death rate of Canada , Germany , Japan and almost every other country on Earth — the planet where seemingly everyone but Americans still reside — the United States has lost more than 260,000 people to the coronavirus .
As Joe Biden often said during the presidential campaign , that is 260,000 kitchen tables without a parent , spouse , sibling or child .
Yet a baffling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if the virus is not real , or at least does not present a threat to them and their loved ones .
A nurse in South Dakota , Jodi Doering , has told the surreal horror story of patients denying that COVID-19 exists , up until the moment that they die from it .
While I can not report anything so extreme , I can say that I 've had conversations with several people — all of them college-educated professionals — who repeat the following claims as if they are self-evident : 1 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , because hospitals make more money from treating those patients ; 2 ) China created the coronavirus in a lab as a biological weapon ( this is one particularly incoherent , because even if true it would not negate the danger of the virus ) ; 3 ) only the elderly die from COVID so we do n't have to worry about it ( if this were true , it would make adherents to that belief sociopathic , not reasonable ) ; 4 ) the only way to beat back the pandemic is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ give their sources of evidence , they will typically fall back on what has become the favorite line of many Americans , a delightful distillation of the ignorance and arrogance of individualism and anti-intellectualism in one sentence : `` I do my own research . ''
According to polls , most Americans believe that COVID is not a hoax .
The majority also regularly wear masks in public , even when there is no mandate .
Despite the good news , there is a gap between theory and practice .
The staggering amount @ @ @ @ @ @ @ example of a general public that suffers from what psychologists are calling `` pandemic fatigue . ''
Having grown tired of compliance with CDC protocols , many Americans have adopted a cavalier attitude .
They have resumed dining in restaurants , shopping in malls , and having parties in their homes .
Gov .
Gavin Newsom of California broke his own coronavirus guidelines by dining indoors with several friends , and New York Times columnist Farhad Manjoo examined the potential of his family 's Thanksgiving gathering to spread the virus , determined that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he was doing it anyway .
With friends like these , everyone concerned about succumbing to a deadly virus might as well throw a mask burning party … indoors .
Meanwhile , the most pathetic attempt at a coup d'état in world history reaches a merciful end with Rudy Giuliani 's hair dye melting in beads down his face as he impersonates Joe Pesci , and his co-counsel on behalf of Trump , Jenna Ellis , telling Republican pollste and frequent Trump critic , Frank Luntz that he has a small penis .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ voter-fraud conspiracy theory , not to mention the micropenis defense , upwards of 70 percent of Republicans now believe that Joe Biden won the election by fraudulent means .
This is n't much different from the 51 percent of Republicans who `` doubt '' that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii , the 50 percent of Republicans who believe that the QAnon theory that a secret ring of pedophiles run the federal government is , at least , `` partially true , '' and the 40 percent of Americans who are creationists .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ variance of ignorant , delusional or insane .
In a country with many of the best universities in the world and almost unlimited technological resources , a salient inquiry for an engaged intellectual class would be , how the hell did this happen ?
Why do so many Americans accept lunacy as empirical truth ?
To begin by reaching for the low-lying fruit , let 's start with the far right .
The late Richard Hofstadter , a Pulitzer-winning historian , authored a famous book in 1964 called `` The Paranoid Style in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ errors , Hofstadter 's analysis of the delusions and fears of the right gains relevance with each year .
In his introduction , the historian explains that Americans are increasingly responsive to politics as competing gestures of emotional symbolism , rather than debates about material interest or theories of effective governance .
On the right , an affinity for symbolism combines with the `` apocalyptic carryovers '' of the `` evangelical spirit '' to create the foundation for the paranoid style .
Hofstadter 's nuanced and detailed definition of the eponymous term of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but here is a key excerpt : The contemporary application of Hofstadter 's delineation of the `` paranoid style '' makes it clear that Donald Trump is flypaper for every pathology that Hofstadter , along with many psychiatrists , diagnoses , but also that Trump 's following marks the culmination of a right-wing divorce from reality that has unfolded over several decades .
The danger of the `` paranoid style '' is clear , but becomes profound when Hofstadter describes how the political paranoid sees the opposition , an analysis that should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ few minutes of Fox News , listened to Rush Limbaugh or gone through the masochistic ritual of attempting to debate a full-fledged Trump supporter : Hofstadter estimated that the extreme right of the John Birch Society and similar movements comprised 15 to 20 percent of the electorate , and therefore was able to distinguish between the `` working politician , '' meaning the typical Republican , and his more militant voters .
Fox News , social media and Donald Trump have obliterated that distinction .
Americans who are curious why their Trump-devoted friends @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reread the paragraph above .
More importantly , people who believe that the political opposition is literally aligned with Satan , as onetime Hollywood star Jon Voight recently said about progressives — in a viral video approvingly shared by many leading Republican pundits — will fall for anything .
If Democrats are Lucifer 's foot soldiers , working to subvert everything that is good in the world , why would n't they use a pizza parlor in Washington to traffic children to pedophiles ?
Stealing an election is a misdemeanor by comparison .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ are pure evil will also justify anything , which clarifies evangelical Christians ' willingness to forgive Donald Trump 's countless offenses against decency , and so many Republicans ' evident glee as the Trump administration did everything in its power to sabotage American democracy .
Hofstadter was wise to make a connection between paranoid politics and Christian fundamentalism .
Like the fundamentalist who suspects the devil of every misfortune or temptation , ranging from a car accident to the temptations of internet pornography , the far right paranoid sees the anti-American , liberal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ life .
Wearing a mask to protect against coronavirus infection is n't adhering with public health protocol , but yielding to the arch-conspiracy of global tyranny .
It is difficult to imagine what life must feel life for these people .
They believe that a homicidal cabal of demons in human form is running the country , feverishly working to destroy their lives with multiculturalism and communism , yet they still have to pick up groceries at the market , drop their children off at school and pay their taxes .
Paranoid delusions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cons , from Steve Bannon 's `` We Build the Wall '' campaign to Donald Trump 's `` Stop the Steal '' fundraiser , but it also makes ordinary governance of the United States painfully difficult .
Before the rest of us judge our conspiracy-theorist neighbors too harshly , we should perhaps consider how their lives also require some detachment from reality .
In January of this year , the members of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists moved the `` Doomsday Clock '' — a measurement of humanity 's proximity to global catastrophe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ midnight , citing the growing threat of climate change .
The United Nations warned in 2018 that the human species had only 12 years left to take decisive action on climate change , before facing existential disaster .
Even the Department of Transportation under the Trump administration predicted that without major reforms , climate change would destroy life as we know it by the end of this century .
There are inspiring movements to demand aggressive measures to combat climate change , and most Americans support them in theory .
In practice , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without a care in the world .
There was almost no discussion of climate change during the recent presidential campaign , and the majority of Americans have n't shown anything resembling the urgency a reasonable observer would expect from people who have learned that their entire species faces the threat of widespread destruction within a relatively brief time span .
In the past two years , major newspapers reported that humanity has eliminated 60 percent of the animal population since 1970 , and that 40 percent of the world 's plant species are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ notional awareness that our planet is dying planet has little effect on political discussion , as powerful officials and influential pundits debate the margins on corporate tax rates , agree that the Green New Deal is `` too radical , '' and argue about Twitter should ban Donald Trump after Biden 's inauguration .
Climate change is one reason among many that Democratic calls for a `` return to normal '' are effectively tickets for a flight from the real world .
Except for having a president who respects democratic norms and institutions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is n't exactly an Edenic paradise to which we should aspire .
Extreme inequality , environmental degradation and the subordination of ethics to corporate capitalism — manifesting most clearly in health care , criminal justice and decaying public infrastructure — was shot through American life then .
Without transformative action , they will continue to wreak havoc in the lives of countless people long into the future .
After a survey of American culture , an obvious question might be : Where are the real realists ?
Wherever they reside and struggle , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right-wing paranoiacs who threaten to undermine American democracy , and the more respectable members of the educated liberal classes , who appear content to turn up the music while the tornado siren blasts outside the window .
Those who are curious how that might work out , especially as we celebrate Thanksgiving , might want to ask a Native American .

On this holiday, millions of Americans are gathering around a homemade feast of comfort food, basking in the warmth of familial love and giving each other a potentially life-threatening virus. One week ago, Erin Burnett asked during the lead segment of her nightly talk show on CNN, "The CDC is warning Americans not to travel or gather in large groups for Thanksgiving. Will they listen?"
Any fool could have answered the question: No. Millions of travelers have moved through the airports to greet their loved ones, perhaps with gestures of physical affection, all but coughing in each other's faces. One cannot help but wonder how many families will share napkins as they debate the efficacy of masks as protection against COVID-19.
A pandemic is dangerous, frightening and chaotic enough in the best circumstances. Throw in a population given to superstition, hatred of experts as diabolical elites and hostility toward science, and reasons to give thanks — other than the ability to breathe without the aid of a ventilator — will rapidly diminish.
The farcical spectacle of ostensible adults screaming about the tyranny of face masks and indulging in megaphone-mad conspiracy theories while their neighbors die would invite howls of laughter, if it weren't so tragic. Far surpassing the death rate of Canada, Germany, Japan and almost every other country on Earth — the planet where seemingly everyone but Americans still reside — the United States has lost more than 260,000 people to the coronavirus. As Joe Biden often said during the presidential campaign, that is 260,000 kitchen tables without a parent, spouse, sibling or child.
Yet a baffling and terrifying amount of Americans act as if the virus is not real, or at least does not present a threat to them and their loved ones. A nurse in South Dakota, Jodi Doering, has told the surreal horror story of patients denying that COVID-19 exists, up until the moment that they die from it.
While I cannot report anything so extreme, I can say that I've had conversations with several people — all of them college-educated professionals — who repeat the following claims as if they are self-evident: 1) COVID death numbers are significantly inflated, because hospitals make more money from treating those patients; 2) China created the coronavirus in a lab as a biological weapon (this is one particularly incoherent, because even if true it would not negate the danger of the virus); 3) only the elderly die from COVID so we don't have to worry about it (if this were true, it would make adherents to that belief sociopathic, not reasonable); 4) the only way to beat back the pandemic is through herd immunity.
When pressed to give their sources of evidence, they will typically fall back on what has become the favorite line of many Americans, a delightful distillation of the ignorance and arrogance of individualism and anti-intellectualism in one sentence: "I do my own research."
According to polls, most Americans believe that COVID is not a hoax. The majority also regularly wear masks in public, even when there is no mandate. Despite the good news, there is a gap between theory and practice. The staggering amount of Thanksgiving travel is only the latest example of a general public that suffers from what psychologists are calling "pandemic fatigue."
Having grown tired of compliance with CDC protocols, many Americans have adopted a cavalier attitude. They have resumed dining in restaurants, shopping in malls, and having parties in their homes. Gov. Gavin Newsom of California broke his own coronavirus guidelines by dining indoors with several friends, and New York Times columnist Farhad Manjoo examined the potential of his family's Thanksgiving gathering to spread the virus, determined that it was significant, and then concluded he was doing it anyway.
With friends like these, everyone concerned about succumbing to a deadly virus might as well throw a mask burning party … indoors.
Meanwhile, the most pathetic attempt at a coup d'état in world history reaches a merciful end with Rudy Giuliani's hair dye melting in beads down his face as he impersonates Joe Pesci, and his co-counsel on behalf of Trump, Jenna Ellis, telling Republican pollste and frequent Trump critic, Frank Luntz that he has a small penis. Despite the legal weakness of the Venezuela voter-fraud conspiracy theory, not to mention the micropenis defense, upwards of 70 percent of Republicans now believe that Joe Biden won the election by fraudulent means.
This isn't much different from the 51 percent of Republicans who "doubt" that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, the 50 percent of Republicans who believe that the QAnon theory that a secret ring of pedophiles run the federal government is, at least, "partially true," and the 40 percent of Americans who are creationists.
e American population is some combination or variance of ignorant, delusional or insane.
In a country with many of the best universities in the world and almost unlimited technological resources, a salient inquiry for an engaged intellectual class would be, how the hell did this happen? Why do so many Americans accept lunacy as empirical truth?
To begin by reaching for the low-lying fruit, let's start with the far right. The late Richard Hofstadter, a Pulitzer-winning historian, authored a famous book in 1964 called "The Paranoid Style in American Politics." Despite a few errors, Hofstadter's analysis of the delusions and fears of the right gains relevance with each year.
In his introduction, the historian explains that Americans are increasingly responsive to politics as competing gestures of emotional symbolism, rather than debates about material interest or theories of effective governance. On the right, an affinity for symbolism combines with the "apocalyptic carryovers" of the "evangelical spirit" to create the foundation for the paranoid style. Hofstadter's nuanced and detailed definition of the eponymous term of his text is worth reading in full, but here is a key excerpt:
When I speak of the paranoid style … it is, above all, a way of seeing the world and of expressing oneself. Webster defines paranoia, the clinical entity, as a chronic mental disorder characterized by systematized delusions of persecution and of one's own greatness. In the paranoid style, as I conceive it, the feeling of persecution is central, and it is indeed systematized in grandiose theories of conspiracy. But there is a vital difference between the paranoid spokesman in politics and the clinical paranoiac: although they both tend to be overheated, oversuspicious, overaggressive, grandiose, and apocalyptic in expression, the clinical paranoid sees the hostile and conspiratorial world in which he feels himself to be living as directed specifically against him; whereas the spokesman of the paranoid style finds it directed against a nation, a culture, a way of life whose fate affects not himself alone but millions of others. … His sense that his political passions are unselfish and patriotic, in fact, goes far to intensify his feeling of righteousness and his moral indignation.
The contemporary application of Hofstadter's delineation of the "paranoid style" makes it clear that Donald Trump is flypaper for every pathology that Hofstadter, along with many psychiatrists, diagnoses, but also that Trump's following marks the culmination of a right-wing divorce from reality that has unfolded over several decades.
The danger of the "paranoid style" is clear, but becomes profound when Hofstadter describes how the political paranoid sees the opposition, an analysis that should resonate with anyone who has watched a few minutes of Fox News, listened to Rush Limbaugh or gone through the masochistic ritual of attempting to debate a full-fledged Trump supporter:
He [the paranoid] does not see social conflict as something to be mediated and compromised, in the manner of the working politician. Since what is at stake is always a conflict between absolute good and absolute evil, the quality needed is not a willingness to compromise but the will to fight things out to a finish. Nothing but complete victory will do. Since the enemy is thought of as being totally evil and totally unappeasable, he must be totally eliminated — if not from the world, at least from the theater of operations to which the paranoid directs his attention.
Hofstadter estimated that the extreme right of the John Birch Society and similar movements comprised 15 to 20 percent of the electorate, and therefore was able to distinguish between the "working politician," meaning the typical Republican, and his more militant voters. Fox News, social media and Donald Trump have obliterated that distinction. Americans who are curious why their Trump-devoted friends broke off all contact might want to reread the paragraph above. More importantly, people who believe that the political opposition is literally aligned with Satan, as onetime Hollywood star Jon Voight recently said about progressives — in a viral video approvingly shared by many leading Republican pundits — will fall for anything.
If Democrats are Lucifer's foot soldiers, working to subvert everything that is good in the world, why wouldn't they use a pizza parlor in Washington to traffic children to pedophiles? Stealing an election is a misdemeanor by comparison.
Those who believe that their political opponents are pure evil will also justify anything, which clarifies evangelical Christians' willingness to forgive Donald Trump's countless offenses against decency, and so many Republicans' evident glee as the Trump administration did everything in its power to sabotage American democracy.
Hofstadter was wise to make a connection between paranoid politics and Christian fundamentalism. Like the fundamentalist who suspects the devil of every misfortune or temptation, ranging from a car accident to the temptations of internet pornography, the far right paranoid sees the anti-American, liberal hand at work in every area of life. Wearing a mask to protect against coronavirus infection isn't adhering with public health protocol, but yielding to the arch-conspiracy of global tyranny.
It is difficult to imagine what life must feel life for these people. They believe that a homicidal cabal of demons in human form is running the country, feverishly working to destroy their lives with multiculturalism and communism, yet they still have to pick up groceries at the market, drop their children off at school and pay their taxes.
Paranoid delusions make them susceptible to a series of cons, from Steve Bannon's "We Build the Wall" campaign to Donald Trump's "Stop the Steal" fundraiser, but it also makes ordinary governance of the United States painfully difficult.
Before the rest of us judge our conspiracy-theorist neighbors too harshly, we should perhaps consider how their lives also require some detachment from reality.
In January of this year, the members of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists moved the "Doomsday Clock" — a measurement of humanity's proximity to global catastrophe — one minute and 40 seconds from midnight, citing the growing threat of climate change.
The United Nations warned in 2018 that the human species had only 12 years left to take decisive action on climate change, before facing existential disaster. Even the Department of Transportation under the Trump administration predicted that without major reforms, climate change would destroy life as we know it by the end of this century.
There are inspiring movements to demand aggressive measures to combat climate change, and most Americans support them in theory. In practice, however, most of us carry along without a care in the world. There was almost no discussion of climate change during the recent presidential campaign, and the majority of Americans haven't shown anything resembling the urgency a reasonable observer would expect from people who have learned that their entire species faces the threat of widespread destruction within a relatively brief time span.
In the past two years, major newspapers reported that humanity has eliminated 60 percent of the animal population since 1970, and that 40 percent of the world's plant species are at risk of extinction. But this notional awareness that our planet is dying planet has little effect on political discussion, as powerful officials and influential pundits debate the margins on corporate tax rates, agree that the Green New Deal is "too radical," and argue about Twitter should ban Donald Trump after Biden's inauguration.
Climate change is one reason among many that Democratic calls for a "return to normal" are effectively tickets for a flight from the real world. Except for having a president who respects democratic norms and institutions, the "normal" of 2015 isn't exactly an Edenic paradise to which we should aspire. Extreme inequality, environmental degradation and the subordination of ethics to corporate capitalism — manifesting most clearly in health care, criminal justice and decaying public infrastructure — was shot through American life then. Without transformative action, they will continue to wreak havoc in the lives of countless people long into the future.
After a survey of American culture, an obvious question might be: Where are the real realists?
Wherever they reside and struggle, they will have to live alongside the right-wing paranoiacs who threaten to undermine American democracy, and the more respectable members of the educated liberal classes, who appear content to turn up the music while the tornado siren blasts outside the window.
Those who are curious how that might work out, especially as we celebrate Thanksgiving, might want to ask a Native American.


alternet--2020-11-26--Conservative Charlie Sykes tells Trump if he wants a pardon — he'll have to admit he's guilty first

Editor and creator of The Bulwark , Charlie Sykes , told MSNBC 's Joy Reid that the most `` Trumpy '' of things President Donald Trump could do is pardon himself ahead of leaving office in January .
After the president pardoned ret .
Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn , it sparked new anticipation on how Trump will protect himself from prosecution after leaving office .
Trump was alleged to have committed at least ten acts of obstruction of justice by special counsel Robert Mueller .
In that case , the Justice Department followed the internal rule that sitting presidents could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stands to reason that the Justice Department would also follow a 1974 memo from the same Office of Legal Counsel that said a president could not pardon himself .
`` Under the fundamental rule that no one may be a judge in his own case , the President can not pardon himself , '' said Mary C. Lawton , Acting Assistant Attorney General at the time .
With former President Richard Nixon , it was former President Gerald Ford who pardoned him .
So , Trump could usher in the 25th Amendment so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pence was the president and Pence could then pardon Trump .
It 's a scheme that Sykes says would n't surprise him .
Rep. Ted Lieu ( D-CA ) , a former federal prosecutor , said that he does n't think the federal courts would recognize such a pardon if Trump tried to do it .
Former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner noted that if Trump was ultimately prosecuted for his obstructions of justice that Flynn would have no choice but to testify in the case .
`` Once you have been pardoned , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extinguished and you can be compelled to testify about anything that otherwise might incriminate you , '' he explained .
`` So , yes , the Michael Flynns of the world could be forced to the witness stand just like Steve Bannon was forced .
However , Joy , I predict he will instruct somebody to type up a part that says , ' I , Donald Trump , hereby pardon Donald Trump , ' and that proves the point that we have to be prepared to fight corrupt pardons .
Just like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sentence commutation that he doled out to Roger Stone because Roger Stone was a coconspirator .
So , the very act of delivering that sentence commutation was a criminal act in furtherance of a conspiracy to obstruct justice .
So , I maintain -- I know Charlie and I might part ways a little bit -- these matters will have to be addressed by the incoming attorney general because corrupt pardons can not be permitted to stand unchallenged . ''
Sykes explained that it 's going to be difficult for Trump to resist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faces a slate of legal problems when he gets out of office .
`` But I want you to think about this for a moment , '' Sykes continued .
`` I think that it is unlawful .
I think it 's unconstitutional , but it will also be seen by the American people as an abuse of power and an admission of guilt .
When you accept a pardon , there is the imputation of guilt .
So , if Donald Trump is sitting there on his final day in office , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he really want to run in 2024 ?
Because if he does want to run for re-election in 2024 self-pardon would be a political disaster .
I think that there would be a huge political backlash against it . ''
At the same time , because Trump is also facing state crimes in New York for tax and bank fraud , it does n't absolve him from those concerns .
`` But it would be the ultimate Trumpian moment of arrogance , narcissism , self-dealing , of putting himself above the law for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ why it is completely conceivable that that will happen , '' Sykes closed .
See the video below :

Editor and creator of The Bulwark, Charlie Sykes, told MSNBC's Joy Reid that the most "Trumpy" of things President Donald Trump could do is pardon himself ahead of leaving office in January.
After the president pardoned ret. Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, it sparked new anticipation on how Trump will protect himself from prosecution after leaving office. Trump was alleged to have committed at least ten acts of obstruction of justice by special counsel Robert Mueller. In that case, the Justice Department followed the internal rule that sitting presidents could not be indicted. Then, it stands to reason that the Justice Department would also follow a 1974 memo from the same Office of Legal Counsel that said a president could not pardon himself.
"Under the fundamental rule that no one may be a judge in his own case, the President cannot pardon himself," said Mary C. Lawton, Acting Assistant Attorney General at the time.
With former President Richard Nixon, it was former President Gerald Ford who pardoned him. So, Trump could usher in the 25th Amendment so that for a short period, Mike Pence was the president and Pence could then pardon Trump. It's a scheme that Sykes says wouldn't surprise him.
Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA), a former federal prosecutor, said that he doesn't think the federal courts would recognize such a pardon if Trump tried to do it.
Former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner noted that if Trump was ultimately prosecuted for his obstructions of justice that Flynn would have no choice but to testify in the case.
"Once you have been pardoned, your Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination is extinguished and you can be compelled to testify about anything that otherwise might incriminate you," he explained. "So, yes, the Michael Flynns of the world could be forced to the witness stand just like Steve Bannon was forced. However, Joy, I predict he will instruct somebody to type up a part that says, 'I, Donald Trump, hereby pardon Donald Trump,' and that proves the point that we have to be prepared to fight corrupt pardons. Just like I maintain, it was a corrupt sentence commutation that he doled out to Roger Stone because Roger Stone was a coconspirator. So, the very act of delivering that sentence commutation was a criminal act in furtherance of a conspiracy to obstruct justice. So, I maintain -- I know Charlie and I might part ways a little bit -- these matters will have to be addressed by the incoming attorney general because corrupt pardons cannot be permitted to stand unchallenged."
Sykes explained that it's going to be difficult for Trump to resist issuing a pardon for himself because he faces a slate of legal problems when he gets out of office.
"But I want you to think about this for a moment," Sykes continued. "I think that it is unlawful. I think it's unconstitutional, but it will also be seen by the American people as an abuse of power and an admission of guilt. When you accept a pardon, there is the imputation of guilt. So, if Donald Trump is sitting there on his final day in office, he's got to decide, does he really want to run in 2024? Because if he does want to run for re-election in 2024 self-pardon would be a political disaster. I think that there would be a huge political backlash against it."
At the same time, because Trump is also facing state crimes in New York for tax and bank fraud, it doesn't absolve him from those concerns.
"But it would be the ultimate Trumpian moment of arrogance, narcissism, self-dealing, of putting himself above the law for him to do it, which is why it is completely conceivable that that will happen," Sykes closed.
See the video below:


alternet--2020-11-26--Former federal prosecutor says judge could void Trump’s pardon for Flynn — here’s how

Former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner responded to President Donald Trump 's pardon of retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn by saying @ @ @ @ @ that the judge in Flynn 's case could nullify the pardon .
`` Just as @ @ @ @ @ grant Barr 's corrupt motion to dismiss , I hope Judge [ Emmet ] Sullivan @ @ @ @ @ this pardon is corrupt & hence illegal/void , '' said Kirschner .
Civil Rights attorney @ @ @ @ @ that he too wants to see how Judge Sullivan deals with the development .
`` @ @ @ @ @ to be entered in the Court docket .
Let 's see what Judge Sullivan does @ @ @ @ @ .
`` Remember , the Court is n't a rubber stamp .
It had to @ @ @ @ @ and Barr 's attempt at dismissing the prosecution . ''
Watch Kirschner in the video @ @ @ @ @ Mike Flynn .
Does Judge Sullivan Have Any Options Left in Flynn 's Case ?

Former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner responded to President Donald Trump's pardon of retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn by saying that it's entirely possible that the judge in Flynn's case could nullify the pardon.
"Just as Judge Emmet Sullivan refused to grant Barr's corrupt motion to dismiss, I hope Judge [Emmet] Sullivan sets a hearing on whether this pardon is corrupt & hence illegal/void," said Kirschner.
Civil Rights attorney Andrew Laufer agreed, saying that he too wants to see how Judge Sullivan deals with the development.
"Flynn's pardon now needs to be entered in the Court docket. Let's see what Judge Sullivan does next," Laufer tweeted. "Remember, the Court isn't a rubber stamp. It had to approve Flynn's plea withdrawal and Barr's attempt at dismissing the prosecution."
Watch Kirschner in the video below:
Trump Corruptly Pardons Mike Flynn. Does Judge Sullivan Have Any Options Left in Flynn's Case? www.youtube.com


alternet--2020-11-26--Janet Yellen and Kamala Harris keep shattering glass ceilings – but global elite boys club remains

by Kevin L. Young , University of Massachusetts Amherst and Tuugi Chuluun , Loyola University Maryland Janet Yellen may soon become the first woman to lead the Treasury Department , about six years after shattering another glass ceiling at the top of the Federal Reserve .
She 's not alone in breaking down barriers in President-elect Joe Biden 's proposed new Cabinet .
Michele Flournoy is the favorite to lead the Pentagon , while Biden named Avril Haines to be his director of national intelligence – if confirmed , they would be the first women in either of those positions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kamala Harris , who on Jan. 20 will become the first woman vice president in U.S. history .
There 's often an expectation that busting these barriers – as women have been doing for many decades – will eventually lead to the kinds of systemic changes that will finally yield parity between men and women in leadership roles in government , the corporate world and beyond .
To understand these dynamics better , we analyzed the connections among the elites who govern many of the world 's most powerful companies and organizations .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and people of color had found their way to the center of these networks , which is a signal of how influential they are .
While Yellen and Harris represent progress , our results show it 's still largely a boys club .
Around the world , women are increasingly making their way into positions of power in disciplines like economics and finance that are notoriously sexist .
Yet despite notable achievements , such as at the International Monetary Fund , where both the present and previous heads have been women , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ male-dominated .
Among big global corporations , for example , women are rarely in top leadership positions .
For example , only 37 of the companies listed among the Fortune 500 are led by women – and yet this is a record high .
In the U.S. , only 5 % of CEOs in the S & P 1500 are women .
[ Get the best of The Conversation , every weekend .
Sign up for our weekly newsletter . ]
Why are so few women breaking through ?
We thought the answer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
These leaders have power not only because they run organizations but because they often have many connections to other elites .
In a paper published in November in the peer-reviewed journal Global Networks , we examined the racial and gender diversity among the elite leaders who govern about 100 of the most powerful organizations and companies in the world based on global rankings and size .
Our list includes some of the world 's largest companies , such as Walmart and JP Morgan , several influential nongovernmental organizations , such as Doctors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and international organizations of all kinds , such as the World Trade Organization and the World Economic Forum .
For each organization , we focused on the individuals who sat on their governing boards .
These are the folks who make an organization 's most important decisions and determine who is ultimately in charge .
We assembled a list of about 1,600 people who were on these boards in 2018 .
We then analyzed their ties to one another in terms of belonging to the same boards across organizations .
In all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ connected these leaders , creating a massively complex global network .
By adding up these ties , we were able to reveal a snapshot of how leaders relate to one another and – more importantly – which leaders were at the periphery of the network and which were at its center .
We wanted to determine whether many women or people of color have made it to the center or core of this global network of elites or whether they mostly remained at the periphery .
Studies of network power have found that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part of this network to have influence ; one must be highly connected within it as well .
We found that women made up about 25 % of leaders in the network – but only 6 % were women of color .
Men of color made up about 21 % .
The other leaders were all white men , who made up over half of those in the network .
What was most striking to us , however , was how few women and people of color penetrated the highly interconnected inner circle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 10 % were men of color .
Very few were women of color .
Yet the figure for white men in the inner circle jumps up to 75 % .
This , of course , is just a snapshot .
We do n't know how it 's changed since or what it was 10 or 20 years ago .
We are currently trying to chart how these dynamics evolve over time .
One thing we do know is that men tend to dominate the inner circle of these networks , and that 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ power and influence .
It 's not enough for women and people of color to make it to leadership positions ; they also need to be able to tap into the center of power networks to ensure the progress represented by Yellen , Harris and Biden 's other Cabinet picks continues .
Kevin L. Young , Associate Professor of Economics , University of Massachusetts Amherst and Tuugi Chuluun , Associate Professor of Finance , Loyola University Maryland This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license .
Read the original @ @

by Kevin L. Young, University of Massachusetts Amherst and Tuugi Chuluun, Loyola University Maryland
Janet Yellen may soon become the first woman to lead the Treasury Department, about six years after shattering another glass ceiling at the top of the Federal Reserve.
She's not alone in breaking down barriers in President-elect Joe Biden's proposed new Cabinet. Michele Flournoy is the favorite to lead the Pentagon, while Biden named Avril Haines to be his director of national intelligence – if confirmed, they would be the first women in either of those positions. And that's not to mention Kamala Harris, who on Jan. 20 will become the first woman vice president in U.S. history.
There's often an expectation that busting these barriers – as women have been doing for many decades – will eventually lead to the kinds of systemic changes that will finally yield parity between men and women in leadership roles in government, the corporate world and beyond.
To understand these dynamics better, we analyzed the connections among the elites who govern many of the world's most powerful companies and organizations. We wanted to see how many women and people of color had found their way to the center of these networks, which is a signal of how influential they are.
While Yellen and Harris represent progress, our results show it's still largely a boys club.
Two steps forward, one step back?
Around the world, women are increasingly making their way into positions of power in disciplines like economicsand financethat arenotoriously sexist.
Yet despite notable achievements, such as at the International Monetary Fund, where both the present and previous heads have been women, the worlds of finance and business remain highly male-dominated.
Among big global corporations, for example, women are rarely in top leadership positions. For example, only 37 of the companies listed among the Fortune 500 are led by women – and yet this is a record high. In the U.S., only 5% of CEOs in the S&P 1500 are women.
[Get the best of The Conversation, every weekend.Sign up for our weekly newsletter.]
The inner circle
Why are so few women breaking through?
We thought the answer might lie in looking at global elites. These leaders have power not only because they run organizations but because they often have many connections to other elites.
In a paper published in November in the peer-reviewed journal Global Networks, we examined the racial and gender diversity among the elite leaders who govern about 100 of the most powerful organizations and companies in the world based on global rankings and size. Our list includes some of the world's largest companies, such as Walmart and JP Morgan, several influential nongovernmental organizations, such as Doctors Without Borders, Oxfam and Amnesty International, and international organizations of all kinds, such as the World Trade Organization and the World Economic Forum.
For each organization, we focused on the individuals who sat on their governing boards. These are the folks who make an organization's most important decisions and determine who is ultimately in charge. We assembled a list of about 1,600 people who were on these boards in 2018. We then analyzed their ties to one another in terms of belonging to the same boards across organizations.
In all, we found about 9,000 ties that connected these leaders, creating a massively complex global network. By adding up these ties, we were able to reveal a snapshot of how leaders relate to one another and – more importantly – which leaders were at the periphery of the network and which were at its center.
We wanted to determine whether many women or people of color have made it to the center or core of this global network of elites or whether they mostly remained at the periphery. Studies of network power have found that it's not enough to be a part of this network to have influence; one must be highly connected within it as well.
We found that women made up about 25% of leaders in the network – but only 6% were women of color. Men of color made up about 21%. The other leaders were all white men, who made up over half of those in the network.
What was most striking to us, however, was how few women and people of color penetrated the highly interconnected inner circle. Just 15% were women and 10% were men of color. Very few were women of color. Yet the figure for white men in the inner circle jumps up to 75%.
Making connections
This, of course, is just a snapshot.
We don't know how it's changed since or what it was 10 or 20 years ago. We are currently trying to chart how these dynamics evolve over time.
One thing we do know is that men tend to dominate the inner circle of these networks, and that's likely allowing them to amass even more power and influence.
It's not enough for women and people of color to make it to leadership positions; they also need to be able to tap into the center of power networks to ensure the progress represented by Yellen, Harris and Biden's other Cabinet picks continues.
Kevin L. Young, Associate Professor of Economics, University of Massachusetts Amherst and Tuugi Chuluun, Associate Professor of Finance, Loyola University Maryland
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


alternet--2020-11-26--How Joe Biden and John Kerry could rebuild America’s global climate leadership

by Dolf Gielen , Colorado School of Mines and Morgan Bazilian , Colorado School of Mines John Kerry helped bring the world into the Paris climate agreement and expanded America 's reputation as a climate leader .
That reputation is now in tatters , and President-elect Joe Biden is asking Kerry to rebuild it again – this time as U.S. climate envoy .
It wo n't be easy , but Kerry 's decades of experience and the international relationships he developed as a senator and secretary of state may give him a chance of making real progress , especially if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of mending relationships rather than “ naming and shaming '' other countries .
Over the past four years , the Trump administration pulled the U.S. out of the international Paris Agreement on climate change , rolled back policies that were designed to cut greenhouse gas emissions , and tried to prevent any discussion of climate change at international gatherings like the G-7 and G-20 summits .
The international community , meanwhile , largely moved forward .
Many countries and regions have pledged to move their economies toward “ net zero '' greenhouse gas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , including China , the European Union , South Korea and Japan .
An increasing number of cities and states have set similar goals .
Trump 's hard-line stance may have actually emboldened some , notably China , to make such announcements .
Getting those pledges implemented is what matters now , and that will require leadership , detailed planning and careful diplomacy .
The U.N. climate conference in November 2021 will be special .
It will be the first time countries will evaluate their progress on the Paris Agreement , and they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Biden has already signaled that he will bring the U.S. back into the agreement as soon as he takes office .
As energy policy experts who have been involved in international climate policy for over two decades , we have watched how countries responded to U.S. involvement , and how their views of America 's ability to lead the world dimmed over the past four years .
The U.S. is the second largest greenhouse gas emitter worldwide after China .
It is also the largest emitter historically .
Concrete domestic action to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regaining trust and standing on the global stage .
Energy is at the center of the climate challenge The effects of climate change are already evident across the globe , from extreme heat waves to sea level rise .
But while the challenge is daunting , there is hope .
Solar and wind power have become the cheapest forms of power generation globally , and technology progress and innovation continue apace to support a transition to clean energy .
In the U.S. under a Biden administration , long-term national climate legislation will depend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that wo n't be clear until after two run-off elections in Georgia in January .
But there is no shortage of ideas for ways Biden could still take action even if his proposals are blocked in Congress .
For example , he could use executive orders and direct government agencies to tighten regulations on greenhouse gas emissions ; increase research and development in clean energy technologies ; and empower states to exceed national standards , as California did in the past with auto emission standards .
A focus on a just and equitable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the decline of fossil fuels will also be key to creating a sustainable transition .
The U.S. position as the world 's largest oil and gas producer and consumer creates political challenges for any administration .
U.S. forays into European energy security are often treated with suspicion .
Recently , France blocked a multi-billion dollar contract to buy U.S. liquefied natural gas because of concerns about limited emissions regulations in Texas .
Strengthening cooperation and partnerships with like-minded countries will be critical to bring about a transition to cleaner energy as well as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other sectors of the global economy .
[ Deep knowledge , daily .
Sign up for The Conversation 's newsletter . ]
How the world recovers from COVID-19 's economic damage could help drive a lasting shift in the global energy mix .
Nearly one-third of Europe 's US $ 2 trillion economic relief package involves investments that are also good for the climate .
The European Union is also strengthening its 2030 climate targets , though each country 's energy and climate plans will be critical for successfully implementing them .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2 trillion commitment to developing sustainable energy and infrastructure – is aligned with a global energy transition , but its implementation is also uncertain .
Once Biden takes office , Kerry will be joining ongoing high-level discussions on the energy transition at the U.N. General Assembly and other gatherings of international leaders .
With the U.S. no longer obstructing work on climate issues , the G-7 and G-20 have more potential for progress on energy and climate .
Lots of technical details still need to be worked out , including international trade frameworks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ greenhouse gas emissions enough to keep global warming in check .
Carbon pricing and carbon border adjustment taxes , which create incentive for companies to reduce emissions , may be part of it .
A consistent and comprehensive set of national energy transition plans will also be needed .
The global shift to clean energy will also have geopolitical implications for countries and regions , and this will have a profound impact on wider international relations .
Kerry , with his experience as secretary of state in the Obama administration , and Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ position part of the National Security Council , may help mend these relations .
In doing so , the U.S. may again join the wider community of countries willing to lead .
Dolf Gielen , Payne Institute Fellow , Colorado School of Mines and Morgan Bazilian , Professor of Public Policy and Director , Payne Institute , Colorado School of Mines This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license .
Read the original article .

by Dolf Gielen, Colorado School of Mines and Morgan Bazilian, Colorado School of Mines
John Kerry helped bring the world into the Paris climate agreement and expanded America's reputation as a climate leader. That reputation is now in tatters, and President-elect Joe Biden is asking Kerry to rebuild it again – this time as U.S. climate envoy.
It won't be easy, but Kerry's decades of experience and the international relationships he developed as a senator and secretary of state may give him a chance of making real progress, especially if that work is conducted in the spirit of mending relationships rather than “naming and shaming" other countries.
Over the past four years, the Trump administration pulled the U.S. out of the international Paris Agreement on climate change, rolled back policies that were designed to cut greenhouse gas emissions, and tried to prevent any discussion of climate change at international gatherings like the G-7 and G-20 summits.
The international community, meanwhile, largely moved forward. Many countries and regions have pledged to move their economies toward “net zero" greenhouse gas emissions by the middle of the century, including China, the European Union, South Korea and Japan. An increasing number of cities and states have set similar goals. Trump's hard-line stance may have actually emboldened some, notably China, to make such announcements.
Getting those pledges implemented is what matters now, and that will require leadership, detailed planning and careful diplomacy. The U.N. climate conference in November 2021 will be special. It will be the first time countries will evaluate their progress on the Paris Agreement, and they will be expected to strengthen their commitments. Biden has already signaled that he will bring the U.S. back into the agreement as soon as he takes office.
As energypolicy experts who have been involved in international climate policy for over two decades, we have watched how countries responded to U.S. involvement, and how their views of America's ability to lead the world dimmed over the past four years.
The U.S. is the second largest greenhouse gas emitter worldwide after China. It is also the largest emitter historically. Concrete domestic action to reduce those emission will be critical to regaining trust and standing on the global stage.
Energy is at the center of the climate challenge
The effects of climate change are already evident across the globe, from extreme heat waves to sea level rise. But while the challenge is daunting, there is hope. Solar and wind power have become the cheapest forms of power generation globally, and technology progress and innovation continue apace to support a transition to clean energy.
In the U.S. under a Biden administration, long-term national climate legislation will depend on who controls the Senate, and that won't be clear until after two run-off elections in Georgia in January.
But there is no shortage of ideas for ways Biden could still take action even if his proposals are blocked in Congress. For example, he could use executive orders and direct government agencies to tighten regulations on greenhouse gas emissions; increase research and development in clean energy technologies; and empower states to exceed national standards, as California did in the past with auto emission standards. A focus on a just and equitable transition for communities and people affected by the decline of fossil fuels will also be key to creating a sustainable transition.
The U.S. position as the world's largest oil and gas producer and consumer creates political challenges for any administration. U.S. forays into European energy security are often treated with suspicion. Recently, France blocked a multi-billion dollar contract to buy U.S. liquefied natural gas because of concerns about limited emissions regulations in Texas.
Strengthening cooperation and partnerships with like-minded countries will be critical to bring about a transition to cleaner energy as well as sustainability in agriculture, forestry, water and other sectors of the global economy.
[Deep knowledge, daily.Sign up for The Conversation's newsletter.]
Creating a global sustainable transition
How the world recovers from COVID-19's economic damage could help drive a lasting shift in the global energy mix.
Nearly one-third of Europe's US$2 trillion economic relief package involves investments that are also good for the climate. The European Union is also strengthening its 2030 climate targets, though each country's energy and climate plans will be critical for successfully implementing them. The Biden plan – including a $2 trillion commitment to developing sustainable energy and infrastructure – is aligned with a global energy transition, but its implementation is also uncertain.
Once Biden takes office, Kerry will be joining ongoing high-level discussions on the energy transition at the U.N. General Assembly and other gatherings of international leaders. With the U.S. no longer obstructing work on climate issues, the G-7 and G-20 have more potential for progress on energy and climate.
Lots of technical details still need to be worked out, including international trade frameworks and standards that can help countries lower greenhouse gas emissions enough to keep global warming in check. Carbon pricing and carbon border adjustment taxes, which create incentive for companies to reduce emissions, may be part of it. A consistent and comprehensive set of national energy transition plans will also be needed.
The global shift to clean energy will also have geopolitical implications for countries and regions, and this will have a profound impact on wider international relations. Kerry, with his experience as secretary of state in the Obama administration, and Biden's plan to make the climate envoy position part of the National Security Council, may help mend these relations. In doing so, the U.S. may again join the wider community of countries willing to lead.
Dolf Gielen, Payne Institute Fellow, Colorado School of Mines and Morgan Bazilian, Professor of Public Policy and Director, Payne Institute, Colorado School of Mines
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


alternet--2020-11-26--The criminal case against Donald Trump is just waiting to be made

What may be behind President Trump 's refusal to concede the election , despite overwhelming evidence that he lost , is a desire for a pardon that might shield him from federal criminal prosecution once he leaves office .
His former White House Communications Director , Anthony Scaramucci , has said as much .
In effect , he wants a hardball deal .
Joe Biden , to use Lincoln 's words , commendably wants to `` bind up the nation 's wounds , '' `` with malice towards none ; and charity for all , '' and he may just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so he can spend the next four years attempting to undermine the government .
Indeed , he has started already .
Trump loves the pardon power .
Just today , he pardoned his disgraced former national security adviser , Michael Flynn , who twice pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his contacts with the Russians .
In addition to four Thanksgiving turkeys , he has pardoned only 28 individuals with close political and personal ties to himself , not a staggering number , but presumably , he is not finished yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of pardons out of the White House in the 55 days before January 20 , 2021 .
Of course , Trump might try to pardon himself .
Then , he wo n't need Biden , but legal scholars are uniformly of the view that self-pardon wo n't stick .
`` No man may be a judge of his own case , '' the venerable maxim goes .
Some have suggested that he could resign , and have Mike Pence pardon him , but this is far-fetched and politically untenable .
Smacks too much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Gerald Ford made the right call when he gave Richard Nixon a blanket pardon in August 1974 , although it cost him the presidency two years later .
The pardon proclamation was silent on just what Ford was pardoning Nixon for .
The text read that Ford as President was pardoning Nixon `` for all offenses against the United States which he , Richard Nixon , has committed or may have committed or taken part in '' from the time Nixon had taken office through the date of the pardon .
Ford @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on what were Nixon 's crimes .
Was it the Watergate burglary , was it the cover up , was there obstruction of justice , the catch-all crime where someone tries to put his thumb on the scales of justice ?
We are not a banana republic , and of course we should not criminalize policy differences .
This would be a bad reflection on the United States .
Of course , after the way Trump has behaved in respect of this election , our reputation around the world for upholding democratic values @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thought , pardon is unthinkable without confession of sin , which leads to absolution .
In `` Merrie Olde England '' where we found all these arcane concepts , the sovereign would only pardon the subject who confessed his crimes against the state .
Nixon never admitted what were his crimes , but Trump should as a pre-condition of any Biden pardon admit all of his crimes with specificity .
If he refuses , no pardon .
There is rampant speculation that Trump may have committed additional crimes in connection with the election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican legislative leaders from Michigan to delay or revoke certification of an overwhelming vote in their state smacks of sedition and conspiracy to defraud the United States .
Their stay at the overpriced Trump International Hotel where they wined and dined sumptuously smacks of bribery .
At stake are the very underpinnings of our democracy .
It would be shameful enough to do this before the election , but to hold out to Michigan voters that their laws assured them their votes for electors would count , is an abomination , which only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the faith of the believer .
The Michigan votes will be counted and certified ; so will Pennsylvania 's , and the people 's voice will be heard .
`` We the people , '' still have the call in this country .
And , the attempt to deny them their franchise borders on criminal conduct .
There are a number of federal white-collar crimes that might be investigated and pursued once Trump leaves office .
Among other things , there are financial crimes : money laundering and false financial filings in connection @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Daniels and Playboy bunny Karen McDougal .
There is tax fraud and tax evasion , insurance fraud and election law violations .
And there is the obstruction of justice in connection with the Mueller investigation , starting with the firing of Comey , and the other 10 instances cited in the Mueller Report .
Mueller declined to prosecute Trump for this conduct because he was a sitting President , and under a Justice Department 1973 legal opinion , this is a no-no .
When the Mueller report came out in 2019 , more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican and Democratic administrations signed an open letter stating that if those same acts had been committed by anyone but the president , they would have resulted in a felony prosecution .
There is bribery possibly involved in his accepting illegal emoluments from foreign governments , whose officials circuited in and out of Washington , stayed at his hotels , played at his golf courses , and purchased his amenities .
Early on , I was of the view that federal prosecutors ought to ignore all of Trump 's commercial crimes .
Some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and they might have other fish to fry .
Besides , the state authorities in New York , New York District Attorney Cy Vance , and Attorney General Letitia James will continue to investigate Trump , because , as everyone knows , they are not bound by a federal pardon .
But , Trump 's most recent crimes are too serious to ignore .
And to ignore them would be to ignore the rule of law .
As The New York Times puts it in a rhetorical question : `` Can America @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ? ''
The attempt to subvert the election with no evidence is pardonable , but unforgivable .
The Hatch Act makes criminal using one 's official authority to influence a federal election and the president is not exempt from its provisions .
To ignore the rule of law does not bind the wounds ; it wraps them in sackcloth and ashes .
Other countries do not believe their leaders are above the law .
Sarcozy is standing trial in France for corruption .
Israel will proceed to try Netanyahu for his alleged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eye for an eye . ''
As Colonel Alexander Vindman said so stirringly at the impeachment inquiry : `` This is America .
Here right matters . ''
Here , the people rule .

What may be behind President Trump's refusal to concede the election, despite overwhelming evidence that he lost, is a desire for a pardon that might shield him from federal criminal prosecution once he leaves office. His former White House Communications Director, Anthony Scaramucci, has said as much. In effect, he wants a hardball deal. Joe Biden, to use Lincoln's words, commendably wants to "bind up the nation's wounds," "with malice towards none; and charity for all," and he may just be inclined to give Trump a pass so he can spend the next four years attempting to undermine the government. Indeed, he has started already.
Trump loves the pardon power. Just today, he pardoned his disgraced former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, who twice pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his contacts with the Russians. In addition to four Thanksgiving turkeys, he has pardoned only 28 individuals with close political and personal ties to himself, not a staggering number, but presumably, he is not finished yet. We can surely expect a flurry of pardons out of the White House in the 55 days before January 20, 2021.
Of course, Trump might try to pardon himself. Then, he won't need Biden, but legal scholars are uniformly of the view that self-pardon won't stick. "No man may be a judge of his own case," the venerable maxim goes. Some have suggested that he could resign, and have Mike Pence pardon him, but this is far-fetched and politically untenable. Smacks too much of Roy Cohn and Roger Stone.
President Gerald Ford made the right call when he gave Richard Nixon a blanket pardon in August 1974, although it cost him the presidency two years later. The pardon proclamation was silent on just what Ford was pardoning Nixon for. The text read that Ford as President was pardoning Nixon "for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in" from the time Nixon had taken office through the date of the pardon.
Ford, however, left us to speculate on what were Nixon's crimes. Was it the Watergate burglary, was it the cover up, was there obstruction of justice, the catch-all crime where someone tries to put his thumb on the scales of justice?
We are not a banana republic, and of course we should not criminalize policy differences. This would be a bad reflection on the United States. Of course, after the way Trump has behaved in respect of this election, our reputation around the world for upholding democratic values isn't roses anyway.
In Judeo-Christian thought, pardon is unthinkable without confession of sin, which leads to absolution. In "Merrie Olde England" where we found all these arcane concepts, the sovereign would only pardon the subject who confessed his crimes against the state.
Nixon never admitted what were his crimes, but Trump should as a pre-condition of any Biden pardon admit all of his crimes with specificity. If he refuses, no pardon.
There is rampant speculation that Trump may have committed additional crimes in connection with the election. His Oval Office conduct in pressuring Republican legislative leaders from Michigan to delay or revoke certification of an overwhelming vote in their state smacks of sedition and conspiracy to defraud the United States. Their stay at the overpriced Trump International Hotel where they wined and dined sumptuously smacks of bribery. At stake are the very underpinnings of our democracy. It would be shameful enough to do this before the election, but to hold out to Michigan voters that their laws assured them their votes for electors would count, is an abomination, which only gives comfort to the cynic and weakens the faith of the believer.
The Michigan votes will be counted and certified; so will Pennsylvania's, and the people's voice will be heard. "We the people," still have the call in this country. And, the attempt to deny them their franchise borders on criminal conduct.
There are a number of federal white-collar crimes that might be investigated and pursued once Trump leaves office. Among other things, there are financial crimes: money laundering and false financial filings in connection with the payments to porn star Stormy Daniels and Playboy bunny Karen McDougal. There is tax fraud and tax evasion, insurance fraud and election law violations. And there is the obstruction of justice in connection with the Mueller investigation, starting with the firing of Comey, and the other 10 instances cited in the Mueller Report. Mueller declined to prosecute Trump for this conduct because he was a sitting President, and under a Justice Department 1973 legal opinion, this is a no-no. When the Mueller report came out in 2019, more than 700 outraged former federal prosecutors from Republican and Democratic administrations signed an open letter stating that if those same acts had been committed by anyone but the president, they would have resulted in a felony prosecution.
There is bribery possibly involved in his accepting illegal emoluments from foreign governments, whose officials circuited in and out of Washington, stayed at his hotels, played at his golf courses, and purchased his amenities.
Early on, I was of the view that federal prosecutors ought to ignore all of Trump's commercial crimes. Some of them might be hard to prove, and they might have other fish to fry. Besides, the state authorities in New York, New York District Attorney Cy Vance, and Attorney General Letitia James will continue to investigate Trump, because, as everyone knows, they are not bound by a federal pardon.
But, Trump's most recent crimes are too serious to ignore. And to ignore them would be to ignore the rule of law. As TheNew York Times puts it in a rhetorical question: "Can America Restore the Rule of Law Without Prosecuting Trump?"
The attempt to subvert the election with no evidence is pardonable, but unforgivable. The Hatch Act makes criminal using one's official authority to influence a federal election and the president is not exempt from its provisions.
To ignore the rule of law does not bind the wounds; it wraps them in sackcloth and ashes. Other countries do not believe their leaders are above the law. Sarcozy is standing trial in France for corruption. Israel will proceed to try Netanyahu for his alleged crimes. They believe in an "eye for an eye." As Colonel Alexander Vindman said so stirringly at the impeachment inquiry: "This is America. Here right matters." Here, the people rule.


alternet--2020-11-26--COVID-19 vaccination doses set to roll out next month — but normal life may still be a year away

The first 6.4 million doses of Pfizer 's COVID-19 vaccine will be available in less than a month , government officials announced Wednesday , with more doses available every week following .
Gen. Gustave Perna , who is in charge of logistics for the Trump administration 's vaccine effort , said that state and local officials were told Friday what their allocations would be .
Those first 6.4 million doses wo n't be nearly enough to cover the 20 million front-line healthcare workers who are responding to the crisis , but Perna said a `` steady drumbeat '' would follow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Some of these initial doses will be designated for a handful of federal agencies—the Bureau of Prisons , the Defense and State departments , the Indian Health Service , and the Veterans Health Administration .
The FDA will extend emergency authorization to the Pfizer vaccine by mid-December , and expects to have 40 million doses available from both Pfizer and Moderna before the end of the year—enough for 20 million vaccinations with the two-shot treatments .
It likely wo n't reach the full public until April .
Ramping up delivery is a problem @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They do n't have the money to implement the massive vaccination project .
They 've received just $ 200 million of the at least $ 8 billion they need .
Another $ 140 million is slated to go out next month , but that 's a drop in the bucket to what it 's going to cost .
Jeff Duchin , a top official at the Seattle and King County health department , told The Washington Post that the Operation Warp Speed vaccine development process was great , but `` it 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ respect to providing the federal funding needed for state and local health departments to actually get vaccine to the population , including the initial priority populations and ultimately , to as many people as possible . ''
That 's on—you guessed it—Sen .
Mitch McConnell , who has steadfastly refused to budge on COVID-19 aid .
`` Tens of millions of dollars are needed for this work in our county and state , '' Duchin said .
`` In addition , this work is tasked to local and state public health departments and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this pandemic nonstop for months and are running on fumes . ''
And still McConnell resists .
Presuming that McConnell unbends at some point and finally lets federal money go to fight this pandemic , the likely schedule for vaccine release and development of herd immunity through vaccination is probably a year away .
The initial doses will go to front-line healthcare workers in December and January .
Then , if production allows , they 'll go to front-line workers , people over 65 , and people with chronic conditions that make them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Those four groups will continue to be prioritized into spring , with enough vaccine available for the general public in late spring/early summer .
By the end of summer 2021 , there should be enough for everyone to have two shots—a process that can span three to four weeks .
There wo n't be herd immunity until 75 % of the population is vaccinated .
Provided the vaccination program can be carried out by adequately funded public health entities .
Provided anti-vaxxers do n't screw it up .
Which means the country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in pandemic mode for another year .
That means , Dr. Anthony Fauci says , do n't plan on resumption of normal life , like having weddings and big family reunions and parties and vacations until 2022 .
`` I think that 's quite reasonable , '' Fauci said .
`` If we deploy a vaccine and we implement public-health measures , I think it might even be sooner than that .
But 2022 , I think , is a pretty good bet . ''

The first 6.4 million doses of Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine will be available in less than a month, government officials announced Wednesday, with more doses available every week following. Gen. Gustave Perna, who is in charge of logistics for the Trump administration's vaccine effort, said that state and local officials were told Friday what their allocations would be.
Those first 6.4 million doses won't be nearly enough to cover the 20 million front-line healthcare workers who are responding to the crisis, but Perna said a "steady drumbeat" would follow every week as production ramps up. Some of these initial doses will be designated for a handful of federal agencies—the Bureau of Prisons, the Defense and State departments, the Indian Health Service, and the Veterans Health Administration. The FDA will extend emergency authorization to the Pfizer vaccine by mid-December, and expects to have 40 million doses available from both Pfizer and Moderna before the end of the year—enough for 20 million vaccinations with the two-shot treatments. It likely won't reach the full public until April.
Ramping up delivery is a problem for state and local governments, though. They don't have the money to implement the massive vaccination project. They've received just $200 million of the at least $8 billion they need. Another $140 million is slated to go out next month, but that's a drop in the bucket to what it's going to cost. Jeff Duchin, a top official at the Seattle and King County health department, told The Washington Post that the Operation Warp Speed vaccine development process was great, but "it's been more like Operation Status Quo with respect to providing the federal funding needed for state and local health departments to actually get vaccine to the population, including the initial priority populations and ultimately, to as many people as possible." That's on—you guessed it—Sen. Mitch McConnell, who has steadfastly refused to budge on COVID-19 aid. "Tens of millions of dollars are needed for this work in our county and state," Duchin said. "In addition, this work is tasked to local and state public health departments and workers, who have been grappling with this pandemic nonstop for months and are running on fumes." And still McConnell resists.
Presuming that McConnell unbends at some point and finally lets federal money go to fight this pandemic, the likely schedule for vaccine release and development of herd immunity through vaccination is probably a year away. The initial doses will go to front-line healthcare workers in December and January. Then, if production allows, they'll go to front-line workers, people over 65, and people with chronic conditions that make them vulnerable, hopefully in December and January. Those four groups will continue to be prioritized into spring, with enough vaccine available for the general public in late spring/early summer. By the end of summer 2021, there should be enough for everyone to have two shots—a process that can span three to four weeks. There won't be herd immunity until 75% of the population is vaccinated. Provided the vaccination program can be carried out by adequately funded public health entities. Provided anti-vaxxers don't screw it up.
Which means the country as a whole will have to be in pandemic mode for another year. That means, Dr. Anthony Fauci says, don't plan on resumption of normal life, like having weddings and big family reunions and parties and vacations until 2022. "I think that's quite reasonable," Fauci said. "If we deploy a vaccine and we implement public-health measures, I think it might even be sooner than that. But 2022, I think, is a pretty good bet."


alternet--2020-11-26--Fox News finally pays a price for its false reports on the Seth Rich conspiracy theories

While Fox News attempts to stay in the niche swirling the toilet bowl drain of ultra-right wing nationalism , it is important to remember that Fox News created the fake news space and showed the world how profitable hate and fearmongering could really be .
Back in 2016 , as the Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump campaigns worked their ways around the country , 27-year-old Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich was tragically killed in what Washington , D.C. police called a robbery gone wrong .
Fox News , with an assist from Sean Hannity and whomever it is he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a conspiracy theory-laden web of lies about Seth 's death , connecting it to Hillary Clinton and the now quaint `` her emails '' scandal .
Joel and Mary Rich sued Fox News in 2018 saying that the right-wing lie factory `` intentionally exploited '' their son 's death to push a political agenda .
On Tuesday , the case was dismissed by both parties as Fox News has reached a settlement with the Riches .
The original story was published by Malia Zimmerman and Fox News promoted it relentlessly for a week @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into what had happened that allowed the news outlet to publish and push the baseless , arguably libelous insinuations that Hillary Clinton and her team had assassinated a young man over emails leaked to the press .
NPR reports that Zimmerman 's reporting relied on help from Fox News `` investment adviser '' Edward Butowsky , and based a considerable amount of conspiratorial speculation on a story that `` relied upon quotes from a private investigator that he never said . ''
Something that both Butowsky and Zimmerman admitted to later .
Why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 're parasitical scumbags , that 's why .
The Rich family released a statement about the case , saying `` The settlement with Fox News closes another chapter in our efforts to mourn the murder of our beloved Seth , whom we miss every single day .
We are pleased with the settlement of this matter and sincerely hope that the media will take genuine caution in the future . ''

While Fox News attempts to stay in the niche swirling the toilet bowl drain of ultra-right wing nationalism, it is important to remember that Fox News created the fake news space and showed the world how profitable hate and fearmongering could really be. Back in 2016, as the Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump campaigns worked their ways around the country, 27-year-old Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich was tragically killed in what Washington, D.C. police called a robbery gone wrong.
Fox News, with an assist from Sean Hannity and whomever it is he gets his bogus information from, promoted a conspiracy theory-laden web of lies about Seth's death, connecting it to Hillary Clinton and the now quaint "her emails" scandal. Joel and Mary Rich sued Fox News in 2018 saying that the right-wing lie factory "intentionally exploited" their son's death to push a political agenda. On Tuesday, the case was dismissed by both parties as Fox News has reached a settlement with the Riches.
The original story was published by Malia Zimmerman and Fox News promoted it relentlessly for a week before retracting it. No further followup into what had happened that allowed the news outlet to publish and push the baseless, arguably libelous insinuations that Hillary Clinton and her team had assassinated a young man over emails leaked to the press.
NPR reports that Zimmerman's reporting relied on help from Fox News "investment adviser" Edward Butowsky, and based a considerable amount of conspiratorial speculation on a story that "relied upon quotes from a private investigator that he never said." Something that both Butowsky and Zimmerman admitted to later. Why did they do that? Because they're parasitical scumbags, that's why.
The Riches also sued Zimmerman and Butowsky. The entire lawsuit was dismissed as part of the settlement. That ensures that Fox stars, including Hannity and Dobbs, will not have to give sworn testimony to the court that could be made public. Another lawsuit, brought by Seth's brother Aaron against Butowsky and others, is still pending.
The Rich family released a statement about the case, saying "The settlement with Fox News closes another chapter in our efforts to mourn the murder of our beloved Seth, whom we miss every single day. We are pleased with the settlement of this matter and sincerely hope that the media will take genuine caution in the future."


alternet--2020-11-26--Trump was no fluke: George W. Bush blazed the trail

My friend and former colleague Bruce Bartlett has done a service by reminding us that after four years of the non-stop catastrophe that was the Trump administration , we should not lull ourselves with the illusion that the 45th president was some aberration that fell out of the sky .
His flamboyant criminality and relentlessly malignant personality may exert the same sick fascination as watching a grisly car crash , but in terms of creating disasters , Trump has nothing on George W. Bush .
As Bartlett points out , Bush 's presidency was filled with the same hubris , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for any government employee who told the president other than what he wanted to hear .
There was much the same contempt for expertise ( `` I do n't do nuance. ''
) .
But understandably , Bartlett focuses on his own area of expertise , economics .
National security gets only brief mention .
As one who spent a career in the national security field , I believe that 's where the real demons lay .
It constitutes Bush 's true legacy .
The terrorist attacks on September 11 , 2001 marked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gave him a convenient boost in popularity , and probably were responsible for getting him a second term .
Yet he ignored so many indications of an impending attack that even the 9/11 Commission , replete as it was with equivocation , coverups , and pussyfooting generally , proclaimed that `` the system was blinking red . ''
Yet Bush preferred to spend that summer playing golf , telling the CIA briefer who informed him of the threat , `` All right .
You 've covered your ass , now . ''
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ medical experts warning him of the coronavirus .
Like Bush , he had better things to do—such as protecting Wall Street .
The almost incomprehensible ease with which the terrorists succeeded was such that a large portion of the American people simply could not believe it was n't a false flag operation .
This paranoia was reinforced by the speed with which Bush and his cronies exploited the attack both for crass political gain , and ( even worse ) to provide a flimsy excuse to invade a country which had nothing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a bête noir of the Bush family .
The bald facts of Bush 's incompetent negligence were bad enough and should have gotten him impeached .
But his brazen use of the tragedy as an excuse to invade the wrong country gave impetus to a plague of conspiratorial thinking that now pervades and suffocates political thought .
The bogus `` technical '' arguments of conspiracy buffs about the melting point of steel in the twin towers were merely the precursors of far-fetched theories about coronavirus being a hoax , and the victims being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has never been the same since that day in September .
The crippling human and material cost of Afghanistan and Iraq set our country on a downward spiral that continues to this day .
Future historians may view 9/11 's effect on the United States as spookily paralleling the 1914 terrorist incident in Sarajevo for its impact on the Habsburg Empire and the igniting of World War I .
For us—although in a more protracted manner – 9/11 may have spelled the beginning of the end , just as Sarajevo did with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Vienna thought the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand at the hands of a Serbian gunman to be a tragedy , but by no means an existential crisis for the monarchy .
But soon enough , the militant faction , led by Foreign Minister Berchtold and General Hötzendorf exploited it as a means to rid Austria of the Serbian `` menace '' once and for all .
They contrived to send an ultimatum of demands to Serbia that no self-respecting nation could possibly accept .
They succeeded in getting their war .
That eerily foretells @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cheney and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld resolved to exploit 9/11 .
Rumsfeld jotted down in his notes , '' Near term target needs—go massive—sweep it all up , things related and not . ''
Empowering the CIA or Special Forces to locate and neutralize the 9/11 plotters was n't enough .
Bush and his paladins gave Afghanistan 's Taliban regime an ultimatum they could not accept , and , for good measure , proceeded to give Iraq the same treatment .
We know the rest .
The crippling human and material cost of Afghanistan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ downward spiral that continues to this day .
Those hideous misadventures spawned the Department of Homeland Security , the agency with the Orwellian name whose menacing potential is held in check mainly by incompetence .
Former employees tell me it is far less than the sum of the agencies that were folded into it .
Yet , even as the twin disaster of Iraq and Afghanistan became evident to any thinking person , the combination of fear , vengeance , hatred , and hubris that the Republican propaganda machine whipped up got the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no longer be viewed with detachment as an issue of national interests , cost , and risk .
It became one more weapon in the culture wars arsenal .
The 2004 was a referendum on Iraq , and , significantly , it remains the only time since 1988 that a Republican presidential candidate won the popular vote .
Congress entered a steep decline , sinking to the level of Franco 's cortes or the central committee under Stalin .
Before the Iraq invasion , I conveyed my strategic concerns to a couple of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ forehead with the heel of his hand and said in mock regret , `` Mike , I wish you had n't told me that ! ''
But I did n't change anyone 's vote ( after all , I was n't a lobbyist with a checkbook ) .
This , too , presages the behavior of Republican legislators toward Trump .
Off the record , they are alarmed by him and disdainful .
In public , they are as grovelingly adoring of him as Kim Jong Un 's subordinates are to the Dear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this day .
Our foreign policy establishment evidently feels toward Afghanistan as a man who has a wolf by the ears .
He knows he ca n't hold on forever , but he dares not let go .
Iraq , where al Qaeda did not exist , spawned al Qaeda in Iraq , which begat ISIS , which then spread to Syria .
It is doubtful a president with the wisdom of Solomon could solve the Middle East problems that Bush created .
And , as if to magnify the errors of his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agreement with Iran , one of the few positive steps the United States has taken in that region in recent decades ( and an agreement that Iran was complying with ) .
For good measure , he gave a hearty thumbs up to the Saudi monarchy 's murderous bombing of Yemeni civilians .
In any case , time is not on our side .
For a decade or more , liberals have congratulated themselves on projected demographic changes in the country that would mean a more diverse , better educated electorate .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ electorally beneficial manner , and is unlikely to do so in the medium term .
Indeed , because of our absurdly archaic electoral system , demographic sorting by region may actually exacerbate the inability to produce an electorate that will vote for moderate – let alone progressive—foreign and domestic policies that will not replicate the disasters I have described .
And it could lead to an even more authoritarian GOP ; the party that already produced Bush and Trump could stumble upon a Führer who was actually competent , and the game will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cumbersome dual monarchy was not up to the challenges of the 20th century , so it is in the 21st century with America 's antique political system ( there is only one example of an institution comparable to our own electoral college : the electors of the Holy Roman Empire , a state which ceased to exist in 1806 ) .
The very structure of our system , combined with an increasingly paranoid and disinformed electorate , means the likelihood of producing a dud occupying the Oval Office is roughly 50/50 .
Austria @ @ @ @ @ @ @ least produced Gustav Mahler , Ludwig Wittgenstein , and Karl Popper .
We seem to be stuck with Ted Nugent and Kanye West .
Mike Lofgren is a former congressional staff member who served on both the House and Senate budget committees .
His books include : `` The Deep State : The Fall of the Constitution and the Rise of a Shadow Government '' ( 2016 ) and `` The Party is Over : How Republicans Went Crazy , Democrats Became Useless , and the Middle Class Got Shafted '' ( 2013 @ @

My friend and former colleague Bruce Bartlett has done a service by reminding us that after four years of the non-stop catastrophe that was the Trump administration, we should not lull ourselves with the illusion that the 45th president was some aberration that fell out of the sky.
His flamboyant criminality and relentlessly malignant personality may exert the same sick fascination as watching a grisly car crash, but in terms of creating disasters, Trump has nothing on George W. Bush.
As Bartlett points out, Bush's presidency was filled with the same hubris, incomprehension of rational policy, and disdain for any government employee who told the president other than what he wanted to hear. There was much the same contempt for expertise ("I don't do nuance."). But understandably, Bartlett focuses on his own area of expertise, economics. National security gets only brief mention.
As one who spent a career in the national security field, I believe that's where the real demons lay. It constitutes Bush's true legacy.
The terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 marked the rest of Bush's presidency, gave him a convenient boost in popularity, and probably were responsible for getting him a second term. Yet he ignored so many indications of an impending attack that even the 9/11 Commission, replete as it was with equivocation, coverups, and pussyfooting generally, proclaimed that "the system was blinking red."
Yet Bush preferred to spend that summer playing golf, telling the CIA briefer who informed him of the threat, "All right. You've covered your ass, now." That behavior strangely foreshadowed Trump's dismissal of medical experts warning him of the coronavirus. Like Bush, he had better things to do—such as protecting Wall Street.
The almost incomprehensible ease with which the terrorists succeeded was such that a large portion of the American people simply could not believe it wasn't a false flag operation. This paranoia was reinforced by the speed with which Bush and his cronies exploited the attack both for crass political gain, and (even worse) to provide a flimsy excuse to invade a country which had nothing to do with the attackers—but whose leader was a bête noir of the Bush family.
The bald facts of Bush's incompetent negligence were bad enough and should have gotten him impeached. But his brazen use of the tragedy as an excuse to invade the wrong country gave impetus to a plague of conspiratorial thinking that now pervades and suffocates political thought. The bogus "technical" arguments of conspiracy buffs about the melting point of steel in the twin towers were merely the precursors of far-fetched theories about coronavirus being a hoax, and the victims being crisis actors. America's mental hygiene has never been the same since that day in September.
The crippling human and material cost of Afghanistan and Iraq set our country on a downward spiral that continues to this day.
Future historians may view 9/11's effect on the United States as spookily paralleling the 1914 terrorist incident in Sarajevo for its impact on the Habsburg Empire and the igniting of World War I. For us—although in a more protracted manner – 9/11 may have spelled the beginning of the end, just as Sarajevo did with the Habsburgs.
Initially, the government in Vienna thought the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand at the hands of a Serbian gunman to be a tragedy, but by no means an existential crisis for the monarchy. But soon enough, the militant faction, led by Foreign Minister Berchtold and General Hötzendorf exploited it as a means to rid Austria of the Serbian "menace" once and for all. They contrived to send an ultimatum of demands to Serbia that no self-respecting nation could possibly accept. They succeeded in getting their war.
That eerily foretells how Bush administration gunslingers like Vice President Cheney and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld resolved to exploit 9/11. Rumsfeld jotted down in his notes,"Near term target needs—go massive—sweep it all up, things related and not." Empowering the CIA or Special Forces to locate and neutralize the 9/11 plotters wasn't enough. Bush and his paladins gave Afghanistan's Taliban regime an ultimatum they could not accept, and, for good measure, proceeded to give Iraq the same treatment. We know the rest.
The crippling human and material cost of Afghanistan and Iraq set our country on a downward spiral that continues to this day. Those hideous misadventures spawned the Department of Homeland Security, the agency with the Orwellian name whose menacing potential is held in check mainly by incompetence. Former employees tell me it is far less than the sum of the agencies that were folded into it.
Yet, even as the twin disaster of Iraq and Afghanistan became evident to any thinking person, the combination of fear, vengeance, hatred, and hubris that the Republican propaganda machine whipped up got the public into lather. Foreign policy could no longer be viewed with detachment as an issue of national interests, cost, and risk. It became one more weapon in the culture wars arsenal. The 2004 was a referendum on Iraq, and, significantly, it remains the only time since 1988 that a Republican presidential candidate won the popular vote.
Congress entered a steep decline, sinking to the level of Franco's cortes or the central committee under Stalin. Before the Iraq invasion, I conveyed my strategic concerns to a couple of congressmen. One of them slapped his forehead with the heel of his hand and said in mock regret, "Mike, I wish you hadn't told me that!" But I didn't change anyone's vote (after all, I wasn't a lobbyist with a checkbook). This, too, presages the behavior of Republican legislators toward Trump. Off the record, they are alarmed by him and disdainful. In public, they are as grovelingly adoring of him as Kim Jong Un's subordinates are to the Dear Leader.
Bush's disasters reverberate to this day. Our foreign policy establishment evidently feels toward Afghanistan as a man who has a wolf by the ears. He knows he can't hold on forever, but he dares not let go. Iraq, where al Qaeda did not exist, spawned al Qaeda in Iraq, which begat ISIS, which then spread to Syria.
It is doubtful a president with the wisdom of Solomon could solve the Middle East problems that Bush created. And, as if to magnify the errors of his Republican predecessor, Trump abrogated the nuclear agreement with Iran, one of the few positive steps the United States has taken in that region in recent decades (and an agreement that Iran was complying with). For good measure, he gave a hearty thumbs up to the Saudi monarchy's murderous bombing of Yemeni civilians.
In any case, time is not on our side. For a decade or more, liberals have congratulated themselves on projected demographic changes in the country that would mean a more diverse, better educated electorate. That change simply has not happened in an electorally beneficial manner, and is unlikely to do so in the medium term.
Indeed, because of our absurdly archaic electoral system, demographic sorting by region may actually exacerbate the inability to produce an electorate that will vote for moderate – let alone progressive—foreign and domestic policies that will not replicate the disasters I have described. And it could lead to an even more authoritarian GOP; the party that already produced Bush and Trump could stumble upon a Führer who was actually competent, and the game will be over.
Just as Austria's cumbersome dual monarchy was not up to the challenges of the 20th century, so it is in the 21st century with America's antique political system (there is only one example of an institution comparable to our own electoral college: the electors of the Holy Roman Empire, a state which ceased to exist in 1806). The very structure of our system, combined with an increasingly paranoid and disinformed electorate, means the likelihood of producing a dud occupying the Oval Office is roughly 50/50.
Austria, though, in its twilight at least produced Gustav Mahler, Ludwig Wittgenstein, and Karl Popper. We seem to be stuck with Ted Nugent and Kanye West.
Mike Lofgren is a former congressional staff member who served on both the House and Senate budget committees. His books include: "The Deep State: The Fall of the Constitution and the Rise of a Shadow Government" (2016) and "The Party is Over: How Republicans Went Crazy, Democrats Became Useless, and the Middle Class Got Shafted" (2013).