Friday, October 18, 2024

Sleepy Donald does not understand the law

Did you catch Chris Hayes' report?


.


There is something seriously wrong with the Convicted Felon. .


.




Let me also note this Tweet about Mr. Trump by Paul Rudnick.





 

Poor pathetic doddering Donald Trump.  The Convicted Felon remains in the news and it is for all the wrong reasons.  Jonathan Chait (INTELLEGENCER) explains:



One of the most important and consistent facets of Donald Trump’s thinking is that the law, as most people understand it, is conceptually meaningless. Legal activity, as he understands the term, means anything done by or on behalf of Donald Trump (this can include tax fraud, stealing and refusing to give back classified documents, assaulting police officers in an attempt to overturn an election, or other clear violations of federal criminal statutes). Illegal activity is anything Trump disapproves of or finds harmful: criticizing pro-Trump judges, displaying too many news stories that make Trump look bad, being “stupid,” or almost any action that works against his interests.


Trump’s view of elections flows from this belief system. A fair election is one that Trump wins. An unfair election is one he loses. Trump has begun to define the very existence of Kamala Harris’s candidacy as a crime.

,

After Joe Biden dropped out of the race, Trump branded the move a “threat to democracy.” Two months ago, Trump mused that Democrats deciding to nominate Harris instead of Biden “seems to me actually unconstitutional. Perhaps it’s not.” (The Constitution has no bearing on the actions of parties, which are private organizations that for most of their existence chose nominees without any public voting at all.) He began to fantasize intermittently that Biden would seize the nomination.

Now, in a new message, he pairs a call for removing CBS’s broadcast license (one of his older authoritarian threats) with demands that Harris be removed as his opponent. “Kamala should be investigated and forced off the Campaign, and Joe Biden allowed to take back his rightful place (He got 14 Million Primary Votes, she got none!),” he rants. “THIS WHOLE SORDID AND FRAUDULENT EVENT IS A THREAT TO DEMOCRACY!”


 Are you laughing at the doddering old fool?  Me too.  "A threat to democracy"?  As though the Convicted Felon himself is not an ongoing threat to democracy.  Does he have no shame at all?  Does he not get that we are not in his cult and that even those who are include people who are laughing at him as he 'cites the law' when, in fact, it is not the law.

He is a brain dead fool.  This goes beyond cognitive decline and aging.  I think the term is "diabetes three." Before my husband passed, that was a proposal for Alzheimer's and had to do with the way insulin can impact the brain.  I believe we are seeing that unfold before our eyes with Mr. Trump.  Brett Samuels (THE HILL) notes:


Former President Trump on Friday alleged nobody had been treated worse than those imprisoned for storming the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, other than Japanese-Americans who were put in internment camps during World War II.
Trump appeared on “The Dan Bongino Show,” where he questioned why those prosecuted for their actions on Jan. 6 were still being held after a June Supreme Court ruling that found an obstruction law used to charge scores of rioters was improperly applied.

“The other thing is as you know they really won in the Supreme Court. The Fischer case and the various cases,” Trump said. “Why are they still being held? Nobody’s ever been treated like this. Maybe the Japanese during second World War, frankly. But, you know, they were held, too.”

Trump, who went on to attack the House committee that investigated the events of Jan. 6, called it “a very sad day in the country’s life.”

Roughly 120,000 Japanese Americans were held in internment camps during World War II after then-President Franklin Delano Roosevelt issued an executive order. The treatment of Japanese-Americans during that period has been widely condemned in the decades since, with President Biden calling it “one of the most shameful periods in American history.”

On Jan. 6, 2021, a pro-Trump mob violently clashed with law enforcement at the Capitol to try to halt the certification of President Biden’s 2020 victory. The riot followed weeks of claims from Trump that his defeat was fraudulent.

How disrespectful.  The Japanese Americans never should have been interned to begin with.  That remains a national shame.  And it is even more shameful to people who stormed D.C. in their violent effort to stop democracy.  There is no comparison between the two groups.  Mr. Trump keeps talking crazy and I do not think he realizes how this crazy talk sounds to independents and swing voters.  Benjamin Carter Hett (LOS ANGELES TIMES) notes:


In a recent interview, Donald Trump claimed that 13,000 “murderers” have been admitted to the United States through an “open border.” He continued that for murderers, “it’s in their genes. And we’ve got a lot of bad genes in our country right now.”
That criminal activity is rooted in an offender’s genetic makeup is an old, largely discredited idea. For Trump to spout questionable science is hardly new. But the disturbing implications in what he said raise the specter of far worse crimes than anything one murderer could do.

The Italian physician and criminologist Cesare Lombroso came up with the idea of the “born criminal” in the 1870s. Lombroso thought that criminals were “primitive” humans born into the modern world — identifiable by their thick hair, dark skin and small craniums. Reflecting the racism of his day, he equated criminals to Africans, Indigenous Americans, Sinti and Roma, even southern Italians. In the fifth and final edition of his book, “Criminal Man,” he concluded that the “struggle for existence” should “shield us from pity” for born criminals, who were “not of our species but the species of bloodthirsty beasts.” Ironically, his criminology became a justification for mass killing.

In the early 20th century, Lombroso’s ideas gradually fell out of favor. But they made a comeback in Germany under the Nazis, as what the Nazis called “criminal biology.” When the Nazis got control of German police, criminal biology became their paradigm for identifying and punishing lawbreakers.

[. . . ]

When Trump makes statements about genetic criminals — especially when he equates criminals with immigrants and ethnic minorities, and talks about giving the police “one really violent day” to deal with them — we should worry. We know the grim truth about where racializing, criminalizing and pre-genocidal language can lead.


This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for today:


Friday, October 18, 2024.  Donald Trump continues to flame out before our eyes as the mind goes and his little weasel JD demonstrates clearly that you wouldn't want him around your own mother.


"Donald Trump pulled out of another mainstream interview Thursday–this time nixing a sit-down with NBC News,"  Mary Ann Akers and Hugh Dougherty (THE DAILY BEAST) note.  In the last weeks, he's done a lot of bailing.  He bailed on the CNN debate, he bailed on his 60 MINUTES interview, he bailed on his sit-down with CNBC's SQUAWK BOX and now with NBC NEWS.  Is there anyone that the Convicted Felon isn't afraid of?  

Akers and Dougherty also note, "His team claimed to Politico that he was unable to do the CNBC interview on Friday because he would be in Michigan. But in fact he will be just a few blocks away from the CNBC studio on Friday morning: appearing live on Fox & Friends."  Even Chicken Little's excuses are now being exposed.  When not running from the press, he appears to be running from the NRA.  David Badash notes that Donald was to give a speech at the NRA's Savannah, Georgia rally next week "but has pulled out."  Griffin Eckstein (SALON) notes the cancellations are "fueling public concerns about his mental state."





Insane.  His begging Joe Biden to get back into the race?  He lives in his own little world of crazy, doesn't he?   At HUFFINGTON POST, S.V. Date  explains:


On Monday, radio host Charlamagne tha God described what he saw as the alternative Americans faced if they rejected Harris. “The other is about fascism,” he said. “Why can’t we just say it?”

She responded: “Yes, we can say that.”

Harris’ explicit overtures to Republicans reflect her campaign’s view that there are sizeable numbers of mainline GOP voters who have been repulsed by Trump over the last nine years, and particularly following his Jan. 6, 2021, coup attempt.

As more than a dozen former Republican elected officials and White House aides stood on stage, a local couple introduced Harris, saying that although they had previously supported Trump, she’d won their vote this year.

“Jan. 6 was the straw that broke the camel’s back for me,” said Bob Lange, who said his wife, Kristina, was “ahead of the curve” because she only voted for Trump once, rather than twice like he did.

Harris spoke in detail about Trump’s actions leading up to and on Jan. 6, including an element that has received little attention: what would have happened if Trump had had a more pliant vice president and his coup had succeeded.

“He sent a mob, an armed mob, to the United States Capitol, where they violently assaulted police officers, law enforcement officials, and threatened the life of his own vice president, and he refused to engage in the peaceful transfer of power,” Harris said. “Were it not for the courage and patriotism of Vice President [Mike] Pence that day, Donald Trump might have actually succeeded in overturning the will of the American people.”

She then tied Trump’s actions in the final days of his term to his new claim that Americans who oppose him constitute an “enemy from within” and his threat to deploy the U.S. military against them.


“Let that sink in — use of the American military to go after American citizens? And we know who he would target first, because he has targeted them and attacked them before: Journalists whose stories he doesn’t like. Nonpartisan election officials, who refuse to cheat by finding extra votes for him. Judges who insist on following the law instead of following him,” she said. “It is clear Donald Trump is increasingly unstable and unhinged. And he is seeking unchecked power.”







Remember, Chief Justice John Roberts and the U.S. Supreme Court killed democracy this year. They gave the president unlimited immunity for official acts. Only the Supreme Court can decide what “official” acts are. That’s a star chamber – right out in the open. That’s not democracy. 

Trump has already said he’ll jail his opponents. That would be an official act, as defined by the U.S. Supreme Court. James Carville is one of the few people who recognize this and was laughed at in some circles for saying it recently. But he’s not the only one sounding the warning bell.

Former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair retired Gen. Mark Milley called Trump “a total fascist,” according to excerpts from a recent book.

Then there’s Trump’s former fixer Michael Cohen. “He absolutely will do this,” Cohen warned me. “Don’t kid yourself. When he says he’ll rain fire down on his enemies, he’s not just talking about immigrants,” Cohen added. The kicker to this is Cohen is still embroiled in legal action against Trump regarding his First Amendment rights and that has gone underreported by a press that should know better. "After all," Cohen notes, "it’s everyone’s First Amendment right. And just think what will happen if Trump is back in power. Do you think he wants critics in the press pool? Do you think he’s going to allow you back in? He’s going to go after anyone who questions him and that’s why the press should be covering this issue more. And you aren’t.”

Carville is of the same opinion and urged reporters to look at what’s at stake here. “General Flynn is telling the truth when he says the gates of hell are going to rain on his enemies. We already know previously the things that he tried to do, how he tried to involve the military,” Carville said.

So understand. It isn’t Harris vs. Trump. It isn’t the Democrats vs. Republicans. It’s Democracy vs. new-age nazis. If you doubt that, then take a look at the recent flotilla of boats in the South where boaters were screaming “Make America White Again,” while flying nazi and Trump flags. 

Trump’s people are trying their best to avoid this issue and we in the press are doing a horrible job reporting it. Why are we still reporting about the immigration problems on the border when we know that Trump killed legislation that could help problems on the border – just so he could run on the issue? Brett Baier didn’t hesitate to ask Harris about immigration when she sat down for an interview with FOX News. I applaud her effort to reach Fox voters and I find Baier’s disingenuous question more campaign manure that shouldn’t be spread – after all too many are eager to lap it up as if it were filet instead of excrement.



You think he feels the walls closing in?  Spencer Hsu and Perry Stein (WASHINGTON POST) note  Special Counsel Jack Smith's Wednesday filing:


In the filing — the first time Smith has formally given his view of how the Supreme Court’s decision in Fischer v. United States affects the Jan. 6 prosecution of the former president — the special counsel pointed to what he alleges were efforts by Trump and his allies to have slates of electors in states won by Joe Biden cast their vote instead for Trump. That, Smith argued, qualifies as impairment of evidence and obstruction of an official proceeding, even under the Supreme Court’s new, narrower guidance.

“In language that applies directly to the allegations here, the Supreme Court explained that [the obstruction statute]’s criminal prohibition includes ‘creating false evidence,’” namely “fraudulent electoral certificates,” prosecutors wrote in a nine-page answer to Trump’s motion to dismiss two of the four charges against him.

Contrary to Trump’s claim that he bears no factual or legal responsibility for the “events on January 6,” lead prosecutor James Pearce wrote, his indictment alleges that he “willfully caused his supporters to obstruct and attempt to obstruct the proceeding by summoning them to Washington, D.C., and then directing them to march to the Capitol to pressure the Vice President and legislators to reject the legitimate certificates and instead rely on the fraudulent electoral certificates.”

The people have a right to know and we have a right to know before the election concludes.  Today, more will be released -- much to Donald's displeasure. 


January 6th came up at the UNIVISION townhall. Dareh Gregorian, Nnamdi Egwuonwu and Ryan J. Reilly (NBC NEWS) report:


Donald Trump on Wednesday shrugged off the idea that his conduct on Jan. 6, 2021, should cost him the backing of Republican voters after a former supporter confronted him at a televised town hall and said he would not cast a ballot for the former president because of his actions that day.

In his response at the Univision event, Trump also distanced himself from the attack on the Capitol, while minimizing the damage done by a mob of his supporters.

"Nothing done wrong at all," he said in a lengthy response after a Republican voter from Florida said Trump had lost his vote because of his response to the riot and the Covid pandemic. The voter also questioned why he should support Trump when so many people who held high positions in his administration, including former Vice President Mike Pence, weren't backing him in the 2024 race.

Trump said only "a very small portion" don't support him. "But because it’s me, somebody doesn’t support they get a little publicity," he said.



If there's a wrong thing to say, Donald will manage to eventually stumble over to it.  Tom Boggioni (RAW STORY) zooms in on one detail from that townhall:


During a discussion on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" on the dueling interviews of Vice President Kamala Harris and Donald Trump on Wednesday, co-host Jonathan Lemire singled out an admission by the former president on the Jan. 6 insurrection that appears to have gone unnoticed.


[. . .]


As the obviously fuming Lemire explained, "Mika, one more note about Donald Trump yesterday, the clip we played about January 6th, talking about 'we,' as he always talks about, uses the word 'we' when he talks about the January 6th rioters."

"He said, 'we were there peacefully, they had the guns," he reported. "The 'they'? They were Capitol police officers –– that shows you Donald Trump's framing of January 6th." 



"We."  The ringleader's no longer trying to distance himself from his treasonous action.  Might finally be time for his family to do what Ruth's long been urging them to do and pull him off the campaign trail.  Aaron Blake (WASHINGTON POST) notes:


In the intervening four years, though, Trump himself has expressed an increasing amount of sympathy for the rioters — not just for their humanity and purported legal persecution (he has repeatedly floated pardons), but also for their actions. He has clearly sought to retcon that day from one of national shame to one that is to be, in many ways, celebrated.

That culminated Wednesday night with a very choice word: “we.”

Appearing at a town hall hosted by Univision, Trump was confronted by a self-identified Republican named Ramiro González who cast Trump’s actions surrounding Jan. 6 as a dealbreaker for him. González challenged Trump to win his support.

But Trump made no apologies for that day. What he instead did was actually link himself to the rioters — stronger than he ever has before.

“There were no guns down there; we didn’t have guns,” Trump said, before repeating: “The others had guns, but we didn’t have guns.”

The first thing to note is that’s false; Trump supporters did have guns and many other weapons. But also consider what Trump has done rhetorically. He cast the insurrectionists as a “we.”


It's a topic Lawrence O'Donnell did a strong walk through in the video below. 



Donald remains a clear and present danger.  He can't stop demonizing people -- American citizens -- that he doesn't like.  Maria Villarroel (LATIN TIMES) notes:



Former President and GOP candidate Donald Trump sent shockwaves through the political conversation after saying some Democrats were "enemies from within" during a recent Fox News interview. The phrase sparked concerns by experts and voters alike over potential measures he could implement if he wins the upcoming elections. But instead of retracting his rhetoric, the nominee doubled down.



Trump acknowledged his categorization of Democrats during a night town hall on Tuesday in Cumming, Georgia, hosted by Fox News' Harris Faulkner. The broadcaster asked Trump to clarify the statement, to which he responded by calling the opposing party "evil" and "dangerous."

"They're Marxists and communists and fascists, and they're sick," Trump said. "We have China, we have Russia, we have all these countries. If you have a smart president, they can all be handled. The more difficult are, you know, the Pelosis, these people, they're so sick and they're so evil."

[. . .]
That same day, at another event in Chicago, Trump also once again refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power when pressed by an interviewer.

Trump's controversial comments took place after Fox News' host Maria Bartiromo asked the former president whether he was "expecting chaos on Election Day," particularly highlighting participation from people on the terrorist watch list or migrants who have committed crimes.

"I think the bigger problem is the enemy from within," Trump responded. "We have some very bad people. We have some sick people, radical left lunatics. And I think they're the big— and it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by the National Guard, or if really necessary, by the military, because they can't let that happen."

Vice President Kamala Harris quickly responded to Trump's declaration, calling a second Trump term "dangerous" at a Pennsylvania rally and releasing an ad titled "Enemy Within." She also called him "increasingly unstable and unhinged," saying he plans to use the military against American citizens and is "out for unchecked power."



Key point from the article: "Nevertheless, this is the first time an American presidential nominee— let alone a former president— escalates his rhetoric to this extent, openly suggesting turning the military on citizens simply because they oppose his candidacy, according to The New York Times."








And then there's , , ,







JD.

Illustration is Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS  "Miss Sassy Can't Stop Lying."  



Miss Sassy remains Donald's best choice for roll dog because Vance is never shamed or embarrassed when his lies are exposed.  He doesn't even replace them with new lies.  He just keeps telling the same lies over and over while pretending as though they were never proven to be false.  So lie in a debate that Donald Trump saved ObamaCare and lie in the debate that your mom got insurance for the first time because of Trump -- when she got ObamaCare?  That's JD.  Miss Sassy is rotten to the core and let's pause that a moment so we can really register how awful he is.


JD's mother got on insurance for the first time after Donald became president.  He was sworn in January 20, 2017.  And JD's ill and poverty stricken mother?  Why didn't Miss Sassy pick up the tab for his mom's insurance.  Did he not love his mother?  Why didn't he help her.  He's buying his first million-dollar plus home during this time (he now owns two homes worth over two million) but he can't take care of his own mother?  He can't say, "Hey, Mom, don't worry, we'll cover your premiums"?  

What a lousy son -- he's the perfect running mate for Donald because he is a lousy son.  What does his mom call him now?  He's changed his name so many times and no really wants to talk about Augustine.  That was his most recent name change.

That was 2019.  His name is James David.  Did he not know there were saints with those names?  And is there any truth to the rumor that he originally went for Saint Alexis due to some bizarre fascination with DYNASTY?  Saint David?  Pretty cool to move mountains, right?  And a politician should especially be partial to the Saint who was speaking to a crowd, a dove lands on his shoulder and he's elevated so that all can see and hear.  But he went with Augustine.  Not James.  He could have gone with James for Saint James the Greater or for Saint James the Lesser.  But he went with Augustine -- because that's the saint the non-Catholics know.

At some point, all these name changes should be an issue to explore in an interview.  Who is JD Vance?  Who is who?



The senator from Ohio introduced himself to the world in 2016 when he published his bestselling memoir, “Hillbilly Elegy,” under the name J.D. Vance — “like jay-dot-dee-dot,” he wrote, short for James David. In the book, he explained that this was not the first iteration of his name. Nor would it be the last.

Over the course of his 39 years, Vance’s first, middle and last names have all been altered in one way or another. As Vance is being introduced to voters across the country as Donald Trump’s new running mate, his name has been the source of both curiosity and questions — including why he no longer uses periods in JD.

He was born James Donald Bowman in Middletown, Ohio, on Aug. 2, 1984, his middle and last names the same as his biological father, Donald Bowman. His parents split up “around the time I started walking,” he writes. When he was about 6, his mother, Beverly, married for the third time. He was adopted by his new stepfather, Robert Hamel, and his mother renamed him James David Hamel.

When his mother erased Donald Bowman from his and her lives, the adoption process also erased the name James Donald Bowman from the public record. The only birth certificate for Vance on file at Ohio’s vital statistics office reads James David Hamel, according to information provided by the state.




Then, in 2013, he changes it to J.D. Vance and then, in 2021, he changes it to JD Vance (no periods after the initials).  Her article leaves out his confirmation name (Augustine).  Maybe she was unaware of it or unaware the importance of it in the Catholic faith.  

But who is JD?  Someone forever changing his name as through he were on the run from creditors.

Who is JD Vance?


Michael Sainato (GUARDIAN) explains:


The Republican vice-presidential candidate, JD Vance, told a reporter on Wednesday that there were “serious problems” in the 2020 election and suggested for the first time that the then president Donald Trump did not actually lose the race.

“Did Donald Trump lose the election? Not by the words that I would use,” Vance said in Williamsport, Pennsylvania. “But look, I really couldn’t care less if you agree with me or disagree with me on this issue.”

He couldn't care less?

Then why did he struggle to answer Lulu Garcia-Navarro last week?  And why did he struggle to answer Martha Raddatz at the start of this week?  And why did he refuse to answer the question October 1st when Governor Tim Walz put it to him in their debate?  Remember that?  Tim said of JD's weaseling out of the question, "That's a damning non-answer."

Clearly, JD did care what people thought of him and of his answer to the question.  

Who is JD? 
 

Let's note Mike Lofgren on this same topic at COMMON DREAMS:


Why did someone a good deal wealthier than most of us abandon his own mother as a public charge on Medicaid? And even when she got off Medicaid, couldn’t he have bought her a health insurance policy, rather than relying on Obamacare? In his autohagiography, Vance made sure the reader got the message that his was a difficult, dysfunction-ridden family. But there is an answer to that.

Vance has also made sure everyone knows he is a pious Catholic of a very strict, antimodernist type, holding that theological precepts should guide secular government (his professed belief is responsible for his frankly idiotic opinions about cat ladies and childless people not deserving the same voting rights as people with children). This should of course make us wary of anyone holding such views getting his hands on executive power; these people have already wrecked the Supreme Court. It also suggests his ostentatious religiosity is largely phony and used as a vehicle for his ambition to rise in the Republican Party.

Isn’t it the Christian thing to do to help those in need, especially as they are your own family, and even more so when they are bedeviled by addiction and other problems? Jesus did not scorn the beggar and the lepers. And don’t the Ten Commandments (which Republican state governments want to make a mandatory part of the public school curriculum) tell us to “honor thy father and thy mother?”

Vance is a 24-karat fraud, the eternal rogue in the human poker deck. How appropriate that he is now the consort, as it were, of Donald Trump, the pathological liar. How fitting that he rose so quickly, after a mere two years, to the very top of the morally bankrupt party I left, more than a dozen years ago, in disgust.


If you're into the topic, read the full column, I'm cutting the above and including because it's effective.  We've been hitting on JD for the last three days and maybe we just hit a pocket where he's strangely popular?  It could be.  But the reason we've hit on it is because some people will stand up and defend him.  I haven't read all of Lofgren's column.  Actually none of it.  The snapshot's dictated and another friend called to ask me to include Mike's column which I'm glad to do.  But they read it quickly with me saying "Next!" after the first line of each paragraph until we got the part above.  And that's not an insult to Mike, his column's worth reading in full but I'm running -- I exercise while I dictate -- and don't have time to stop and pull up the column on my phone and don't have time to hear the whole thing.


We grabbed the section that would reach.  Column's great and it will educate you -- including how MAGA pretends to be about family and many other thins.  But on JD's duplicitous nature, nothing is making that more clear to groups we speak to then hitting on Mom's lack of insurance.  That's why after this proved effective on Tuesday, I wanted to find out when the money came in and what he was doing -- and what he was doing was purchasing a house that cost more than a million dollars while ignoring the health needs of his own mother.


My mother passed away some time ago.  So I throw that in and note that maybe that's why I find this so shocking -- I miss my own mother so it seems repulsive to me that someone who had so much wealth wouldn't even try to help his mother with insurance.


And that's the blow that takes out support for the little weasel when you're face to face with people.  That's what they can identify with.  I bring up my mother's passing and it sets the tone because their mother has passed or now they're thinking about the day when their mom will pass.  And it's no longer abstract.  And when you boil it down to his mother needing help to get insurance and he's off buying a house that costs over a million dollars, that tends to nail him in everyone's eyes as the selfish little weasel that he truly is.  So if you're speaking to friends or speaking to groups and you need to deal with the reality of Miss Sassy JD Vance, that's a topic you should probably hit on.  There's an effort afoot to redefine him and that's one of the easiest ways you can convey to others what a weirdo he is -- so much weirder than we initially knew. 



The following sites updated:




Posted by at