April 28 2024 Selling Poison: Anniversary of Trump’s Deadly Fake Covid Cure Loyalty Test

       Here the deadly loyalty test of a cult leader combines with science denialism as a form of conspiracy theory, and of theocratic terror and subversion of democracy as America’s horrific new religion, QAnon.

     Thus far Traitor Trump has escaped trial for his attempted mass murder of his followers, just as he has not yet been bought a Reckoning for leading an armed insurrection against America, nor for the campaign of arson, looting, and violence by Homeland Security and their deniable assets to disrupt the Black Lives Matter protests as a just cause of war to occupy democratic cities with federal troops, nor for his actions as a Russian spy to clear the way for the invasion of Ukraine by his puppetmaster, nor for the subversion of democracy and the sabotage of our institutions, nor for theocratic patriarchal sexual terror nor white supremacist terror.

     The treasonous and dishonorable crimes against America and all humankind of Our Clown of Terror, Traitor Trump, most destructive of all foreign agents who have ever attacked our nation even including 911 and Pearl Harbor, have tested but also exposed the flaws and systems failures of our society and our democracy, and revealed what remains to be done if we are to become a true free society of equals.

     America is now a Wilderness of Mirrors and our democracy performative, a theatre of lies and illusions owned by those who would enslave us, but we see now the man behind the curtain for the humbug that he is, and this is a genie which cannot be put back in its bottle.

     Thanks for showing us all what’s under your masks, Republicans; Treason, Racism, Untruth, Misogyny, Predator.

     And now that the true nature of the enemy stands exposed before history and the stage of the world, our liberation is only a matter of time.

     For we are many, we are watching, and we are the future.  

     As I wrote in my post of April 28 2022, Science Denialism: the Seduction of Magical Thinking; This week marks the anniversary of one of the most bizarre and nonsensical performances Trump ever delivered as our Clown In Chief; his advocacy of injecting bleach and getting a “light inside the body” as a cure for the Pandemic. And fully a year later, a bogus church selling bleach as a miracle cure, which the FDA says causes “severe vomiting, severe diarrhea, life-threatening low blood pressure caused by dehydration and acute liver failure after drinking these products”, was finally shut down and its leaders indicted on federal charges.

    A few days ago my partner Theresa attended a funeral for a cousin who committed suicide by drinking bleach, which destroyed her internal organs within days of agony, after years of crippling pain and total disability dying slowly and even more horrifically from lupus. This is the fate to which Trump condemned his followers as a loyalty test; with the example of Jim Jones before us, one would think we’d have all learned not to drink the Kool Aid.

     Authority serves only its own power, and there is no just authority.

     As an example of science denialism, the bleach episode typifies how authority weaponizes faith to subjugate followers, and the nature of science denialism as conspiracy theory, magical thinking, and an alternate reality of submission to an authority.

    As I wrote in my post of April 24 2020, Absurd Clown of Terror Touts Deadly Snakeoil Cures; Our absurd Clown of Terror, Traitor Trump, lets his mask slip and unleashes pandemonium when he touts deadly snake oil cures of injecting or swallowing bleach and “getting light into the body”, the most likely results of which are severe illness and moreover do nothing to cure or prevent viruses.

     Repeating the lunatic claims of cult leader and profiteer of death Mark Grenon, and his promoter, television personality Alan Keyes, Trump rambles witlessly before the world once again, displaying his freakish monstrosity as an idiot madman of delusions and perversions. For beneath the mask lies the demon whom he worships and to whom he would sacrifice America and us all; Moloch the Seducer, Fount of Lies.

     For an excellent interrogation of how tyranny operates through falsification, lies, illusions, rewritten histories, alternate realities, and conspiracy theories in our subjugation, enslavement, and the theft of the soul, see Buffy the Vampire Slayer, season one, episode 8; I, Robot…You, Jane. Crucial to the understanding of conspiracy theories is that Moloch, whose name means King, is claimed as the Big Bad of QAnon; the first principle of propaganda is deflection or to claim your enemies are doing whatever you actually are. The second is to assault the idea of truth itself by exaggerating claims to the point where belief becomes an act of perverted faith and a loyalty test.

    For a brilliant fictionalization of how conspiracy theories work as falsification in the context of QAnon’s previous iteration, the Nazi blood libel against the Jews, read Umberto Eco’s magisterial novel The Prague Cemetery.

    Mark Grenon has been described by Ed Pilkington writing in The Guardian; “ Grenon styles himself as “archbishop” of Genesis II – a Florida-based outfit that claims to be a church but which in fact is the largest producer and distributor of chlorine dioxide bleach as a “miracle cure” in the US. He brands the chemical as MMS, “miracle mineral solution”, and claims fraudulently that it can cure 99% of all illnesses including cancer, malaria, HIV/Aids as well as autism.

     Since the start of the pandemic, Genesis II has been marketing MMS as a cure to coronavirus. It advises users, including children, to mix three to six drops of bleach in water and drink it.

     In his weekly televised radio show, posted online on Sunday, Grenon read out the letter he wrote to Trump. He said it began: “Dear Mr President, I am praying you read this letter and intervene.”

     Grenon said that 30 of his supporters have also written in the past few days to Trump at the White House urging him to take action to protect Genesis II in its bleach-peddling activities which they claim can cure coronavirus.

     On Friday, hours after Trump talked about disinfectant on live TV, Grenon went further in a post on his Facebook page. He claimed that MMS had actually been sent to the White House. He wrote: “Trump has got the MMS and all the info!!!”

     “Another advocate of bleach as a miracle cure who has been seeking to interest Trump in the treatment is Alan Keyes. He is a former ambassador and adviser to Ronald Reagan who ran unsuccessfully as a Republican candidate for the US Senate and on three occasions for the US presidency.

     Keyes has featured Genesis II bleach products as a miracle cure on his online conservative TV show, Let’s Talk America.

     It is not known whether Keyes has discussed MMS with Trump. But the two men have overlapping interests.

     Not only have they both featured in Republican party and presidential politics, but they were both leading proponents of the Birther conspiracy theory that wrongfully suggested Barack Obama was born outside America.

     Keyes’s TV show is hosted on IAMtv, a rightwing web-based channel. IAMtv’s other leading anchor is Bob Sisson, who has also advertised Genesis II bleach products on air.”

     “Paradoxically, Trump’s outburst about the possible value of an “injection” of disinfectant into the lungs of Covid-19 sufferers came just days after a leading agency within the president’s own administration took action to shut down the peddling of bleach as a coronavirus cure around the US.

     Last week the US Food and Drug Administration obtained a federal court order barring Genesis II from selling what was described as “an unproven and potentially harmful treatment for Covid-19”. The FDA also ordered a disciple of Genesis II, Kerri Rivera, to remove claims that MMS cured coronavirus from her website.

     Last August the FDA issued an urgent warning urging Americans not to buy or drink MMS, which it said was a “dangerous bleach which has caused serious and potentially life-threatening side effects”. Drinking MMS can cause nausea, diarrhea and severe dehydration that can lead to death, the federal agency said.”

     As I wrote in my post of May 19 2020, Delusions and Lies of Our Clown of Terror: the Case of Hydroxychloroquine; How do the bogus and lunatic claims of a mentally disabled anti-Semite and a swindler end up among the mirror universe of delusions and lies touted as national policy by our Clown of Terror?

     By what special and secret routes is America now governed in the age of fascist tyranny and plutocratic looting, white supremacist terror, and Gideonite patriarchy under the leadership of Traitor Trump?

     For a true picture of the dangers of a mad idiot tyrant committed to the subversion of democracy by exploiting the structural instability of an unchecked Imperial Presidency, I offer the case of Hydroxychloroquine.

     In the words of Nick Robins-Early writing in Huffpost; “President Donald Trump’s obsession with the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for the coronavirus may have started in part because of a self-described philosopher in China who is a fan of white nationalists, tweets anti-Semitic rhetoric and calls chloroquine “a Nazi drug that is here to teach a lesson to leftists about bias.”

     Weeks before Trump first promoted the drug, a Twitter conversation about hydroxychloroquine between “philosopher” Adrian Bye and two cryptocurrency investors set off a chain of events that would bring the unproven drug to the attention of Elon Musk, Fox News pundits and Trump.”

    And as I wrote on July 29 2020 Weaponized Religion, the Subversion of Democracy, Lunatic Anti-Science Propaganda, and the Legacy of American Imperialism; In the now enormous category of lies and disinformation campaigns against objective truth and scientific rationality, Trump’s recent endorsement of the lunatic claims of a Nigerian doctor now practicing medicine in Texas who is a member of a Pentecostal Church which promulgates religious and medical nonsense that has resulted in an epidemic of children murdered as witches by their parents and a violent pogrom against LGBT people in Nigeria stands near the pinnacle of our Clown of Terror’s crimes against humanity, one which would be hilarious if it were not so dangerous.

     As you may be aware, the years-long wave of children murdered by their parents as witches in Africa was perpetrated by American religious fanatics in a coordinated campaign of colonialist and imperialist destabilization. In Nigeria this has the full collaboration of the government, with the persecution and orchestrated violence against LGBT persons being a dual campaign of mass hysteria and state terror.

     It parallels the seizure of Guatemala and El Salvador by Pat Robertson and other Gideonite fundamentalists through his front man Rios Montt and the subsequent Mayan Genocide. The masses of refugees at our border are a direct result of the latter, part of American sponsored political subversion and economic warfare responsible for the collapse of Venezuela, Columbia, Mexico, and Central America.

     America has weaponized religion as an instrument of dominion, and it is this same fascist network of Pentecostal and Charismatic organizations which have achieved the capture of the Republican Party and the subversion of democracy here at home. Their brutal campaign against the equality, freedom of bodily autonomy, and reproductive rights of women is the wedge issue the Republicans use to goad the poor into voting against their own interest, but it is only the home front of a global programme of cultural, political, and economic warfare intended to seize and maintain an American hegemony of power and privilege.

    God With Us; it is an old motto from the Crusades, and it has a complex and nefarious history. It has been used by the Inquisition against the Jews and Muslims, in the medieval witch hunts to transfer and consolidate patriarchal power as described by Silvia Federici in Caliban and the Witch and Witch-Hunting and Women. Gott Mitt Uns was the battle cry of the magnificent King Gustav Adolf of Sweden in his epochal victory over the Catholic forces of Imperial Austria at the Battle of Breitenfeld in 1631 which liberated Protestant Germany during the horrific Thirty Years War, the monument of which reads ”Freedom of Religion for All Mankind” and is the origin of the doctrine of separation of church and state in America; Gott Mitt Uns was also appropriated by Hitler, who sought to recall the glorious legacy of his namesake.

     There is no more dangerous person than one who believes God is on his side, for that belief can justify anything and conceal evil behind a mask of good.

     As Agence France-Presse writes in scmp; “A Houston doctor who praised hydroxychloroquine as a miracle coronavirus cure in a viral video retweeted by President Donald Trump blames gynaecological problems on sex with evil spirits and believes the US government is run by “reptilians”.

     Stella Immanuel’s viral speech has drawn attention to a little-known group calling themselves “America’s Frontline Doctors” who appear to exist to promote the common antimalarial drug in the fight against Covid-19.”

     “Immanuel was born in 1965, received her medical degree at the University of Calabar in Nigeria.”

     “Nobody needs to get sick. This virus has a cure – it is called hydroxychloroquine,” Immanuel exclaimed Monday as she stood on the steps of the Supreme Court in Washington at a so-called “White Coat Summit” of like-minded doctors.”

     “Early on in the pandemic, scientists were eager to find out whether hydroxychloroquine’s antiviral properties would make it effective in real-world patients with SARS-CoV-2.

     So far though, all the major clinical trials that have reported their findings on this question have found no benefit, and leading national health authorities have moved to restrict its use because of potential cardiac harm.”

     “The clip was shared by Trump and described as a “must watch” by his son Donald Trump Jnr, but has since been deleted by Facebook, Twitter and YouTube for promoting misinformation.        

     “Trump also complained about his plummeting approval ratings as compared to those of Dr Anthony Fauci, the top medical adviser on the White House coronavirus task force.”

     “And the curious case of Immanuel and colleagues – first reported in depth by The Daily Beast – underscores just how far the drug’s advocates are willing to go.

     The website for “America’s Frontline Doctors” was registered just 11 days ago, a web domain age checker revealed – and the site was taken down by Tuesday afternoon.

     “Tea Party Patriots”, a right-wing political group backed by wealthy Republicans, said on its website it was responsible for organising the Washington summit.

     Further research on Immanuel’s web page, now accessible only via an archived website viewer, as well as her YouTube account, reveal a long list of bizarre and unscientific beliefs.

     These include that “tormenting spirits” routinely have “astral sex” with women, which in turn causes “gynaecological problems, marital distress, miscarriages” and more.

     In a 2015 video, Immanuel, who leads a religious group called Fire Power Ministries, said: “There are people ruling this nation that are not even human,” describing them as “reptilian spirits” who are “half human, half ET.”

In the same video she rails against the use of “alien DNA” to treat sick people, which she said had resulted in human beings mixing with demons.

     Other targets of her anger include gay marriage, which she said would result in adults marrying children.”

     As written by David Gorski for Science Based Medicine on January 25, 2021; “Last week, SBM’s fearless founder Steve Novella wrote what I considered to be an important post about the danger of conspiratorial thinking to science-based medicine (SBM), noting that anything that threatens the institutions of science, such as conspiratorial thinking, is a huge threat to science. He correctly noted one example of pseudoscience that is based on conspiratorial thinking, namely the antivaccine movement. Indeed, I once noted that all antivaccine views—and, no, I’m not going to qualify that statement, as I do mean all antivaccine views—are ultimately based on, or, in the case of the vaccine-hesitant at least supported by, a grand conspiracy theory that six years ago I dubbed “the central conspiracy theory of the antivaccine movement“.

     What is that conspiracy theory? Regular readers will recognize it immediately when I characterize it. In brief, the central conspiracy theory of the antivaccine movement is that vaccines are dangerous (and, in many tellings, ineffective) but that “they” are hiding the evidence of that harm and ineffectiveness. Who are “they”? Obviously “they” include the CDC, the FDA, big pharma (of course!), the medical profession, the press, and pretty much everyone else outside of the select, small group of those who are enlightened and thus privy to this “hidden knowledge”. Although it seemed odd at the time to many, in retrospect it shouldn’t have been (and wasn’t) so strange how soon after the COVID-19 pandemic hit antivaxxers made common cause with COVID-19 deniers. Of course, I’ve discussed the importance of conspiracy theories in medical quackery, especially the antivaccine movement and COVID-19 denial, several times before. This time, however, I’d like to broaden the discussion.

     Obviously, I agree with Steve regarding the danger of conspiratorial thinking to SBM. Where we differ (and some might even view it as quibbling, more of a different in emphasis rather than substance) is that, to me, Steve doesn’t go far enough. If there’s anything that the pandemic has taught me, with the help of Mark Hoofnagle, it’s that all science denial is rooted in conspiracy theory. Steve mentioned, for instance, flat earthers and QAnon. QAnon, of course, is basically the ur-conspiracy theory for the age of Donald Trump, a conspiracy theory so adaptable that it can be all things to all people, even as others have pointed out that Q is very much akin to the old Jewish Blood Libel conspiracy theory, rebranded and revamped for the Facebook century, with more than a dash of the Satanic panic of the latter decades of the last century. Remember, at its heart, the QAnon conspiracy theory claims that there is a secret cabal of Satan worshipers (who are also pedophiles) who secretly rule the world behind the scenes from positions of power in the government, banks, news media, entertainment industry, and church. (Oh, and they’re also cannibals, killing children for the adrenochrome in their blood.)

     In addition to the antivaccine movement, Steve also mentioned QAnon (of course!), alternative medicine supporters, and the flat earth movement. Now let me readjust the emphasis and introduce what I would like to refer to as the central conspiracy theory of science denial. It’s basically the central conspiracy theory of the antivaccine movement, just much broader.

     The central conspiracy theory of science denial

I begin this section by restating the central conspiracy theory of the antivaccine movement: Vaccines are harmful (and don’t work), but “they” are hiding the evidence of this. Now, let’s take the title of a book that was among the things that got me interested in investigating the claims and appeal of alternative medicine: Kevin Trudeau’s book, Natural Cures “They” Don’t Want You to Know About, originally published in 2005, which, unsurprisingly, was the year when I first started blogging in earnest on my first blog. The central premise of the book was, of course, that there are “all-natural” cures for basically all illnesses, be they serious or less so, including cancer, herpes, arthritis, AIDS, acid reflux disease, phobias, depression, obesity, diabetes, multiple sclerosis, lupus, chronic fatigue syndrome, attention deficit disorder, muscular dystrophy, etc., but that these “cures” are being intentionally “hidden” and “suppressed.” And who’s “hiding” and “suppressing” these “cures”? It is, of course, the usual suspects: The FDA, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the CDC (in the case of vaccines and “natural cures” for vaccine-preventable diseases), the major food and drug companies, and, of course, the entire medical profession, all in an effort to protect the profits of these industries and the authority of governmental agencies and the medical profession.

     Now let’s look at a sampling of various forms of science denial and the conspiracy theories associated with each of them:

     Evolution denial (a.k.a.) creationism. Creationists deny the science of evolution. Among creationists, there are two major types: “Young earth” creationism (YEC) and “intelligent design” creationists. YEC completely deny evolution in favor of a strict literalist interpretation of the Bible in which all lifeforms were created by God roughly 6,000 years ago and all the science that says the earth is billions of years old is false. “Intelligent design” creationism (ID) concedes that evolution has occurred (to some degree or other) and that the earth might be 4 billion years old, but denies that evolution by natural selection (and other forms of selection) is the driving force that resulted in the current diversity of life that we now observe. Instead, ID posits that there was an “intelligent designer” who guided (and continues to guide) evolution. ID creationists like to obfuscate who this “designer” might be, but, however much they try to obfuscate, it’s clear that the “designer” is God and that ID is, at its heart, little different from YEC other than in sophistication. Personally, I like to liken ID creationists to antivaxxers who claim that they’re “not antivaccine” but rather “vaccine safety advocates” in that, like such antivaxxers are trying to hide that they are antivaccine, ID creationists try to hide that they are anti-evolution. In this model, as is the case for antivaxxers who proudly proclaim that they are antivax, I almost have more respect for young earth creationists, because they at least are being more honest that they are antievolution and that their resistance to evolution is based on a literal interpretation of the Bible. In any event, the central conspiracy theory of creationism, be it YEC or ID, is that a shadowy cabal of atheists, biologists (a.k.a. “Darwinists” in creationist parlance), and “secularists” are “hiding” or “suppressing” the evidence that “Darwinism” is a “sham”. Usually, the motivation of these “atheists” and “Darwinists” is to deny and suppress religion.

     Climate science denial. Currently, the scientific consensus regarding climate change is that the earth is warming (and has been since the industrial age started) due to human activity, specifically the CO2 and other “greenhouse gases” released into the atmosphere primarily by the burning of fossil fuels, leading to the “greenhouse” effect trapping heat in the atmosphere. More recent evidence suggests the possibility, even likelihood, of catastrophic increases in average global temperatures over the next several decades that will result in, among other things, the melting of glaciers and polar ice (with resulting elevations in sea level), more extensive droughts, more extreme weather, ocean disruption, and worse. Climate science thus concludes that the only way to avert potential catastrophe is to massively (and rapidly) decrease the burning of fossil fuels. Climate science denialists, as you might expect, deny the climate science that concludes that human activity is the primary driver of climate change and overall global warming. Their central conspiracy theory is that a cabal of “radical environmentalists,” governments, universities, and climate scientists are “hiding” and “suppressing” the “real” data showing that human activity is not causing global warming and/or “manipulating” the data to make it appear that human activity is causing increased CO2 levels and warming the planet.

     Alternative cancer cures. Believers in alternative cancer cures claim that there are, as Kevin Trudeau claimed, “natural cures” for cancer, although they do not limit themselves to just “natural cures.” (After all, Stanislaw Burzynski’s “antineoplastons” are hardly “natural” when you come right down to it, even though they were sold as “natural” endogenous cancer fighting compounds and originally isolated from human urine; on second thought, I guess that’s “natural” enough.) The central conspiracy theory here is—you guessed it—that the FDA, oncologists, scientists, and—of course!— big pharma are suppressing”/”denying”/”covering up” the evidence that these cancer cures exist and work, all to protect the profits of big pharma and the power of government regulatory agencies like the FDA. In fact, alternative medicine in general denies the efficacy of modern medicine and claims that there are “natural” cures being hidden from you or that various conditions we treat to prevent disease, such as hypercholesterolemia, are not really a risk to your health.

     COVID-19 denial. COVID-19 deniers claim that COVID-19 is in actuality not a serious illness, that the pandemic is overhyped, and/or that it was intentional. I’ve written about the conspiracy theories that flow from COVID-19 denial before on multiple occasions. Most prominent are conspiracy theories that claim that the pandemic was really a “plandemic” intentionally caused by a shadowy cabal of governments, the World Health Organization, scientists, and (of course) Bill Gates, all in order to impose authoritarian controls on the world. (One such conspiracy theory, the Oblivion Agenda, even claims that COVID-19 is a bioweapon introduced by an unholy alliance of the global elite and aliens to “depopulate” the world in order to allow the elites to let the aliens in and thereby profit. I kid you not.) The other version of this conspiracy theory is the “casedemic,” which claims that the pandemic is a result of PCR tests for SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19, in which the cycle threshold is set too high and thus too sensitive, producing way more false positives than true positives. The motivation? Again, control and profit on the part of drug companies, testing companies, and the government. How to explain the >400,000 deaths in the US (and climbing rapidly)? COVID-19 deniers claim that the vast majority of these deaths were really due to something else and intentionally misattributed to COVID-19.

     Anti-GMO. Anti-GMO activists demonize genetically modified organisms based o the same techniques common to science denial: cherrypicked studies, misrepresentation of studies, confusing correlation with causation, pseudoscience, logical fallacies, fake experts, and more. Then, of course, there is the conspiracy theory behind it all, that companies that sell GMOs, especially Monsanto, are “suppressing” the “truth” about GMOs (namely that they are harmful to your health), all in order to profit and cement control over agriculture. Of course, it doesn’t help that Monsanto has engaged in questionable business practices; that history makes it very easy for anti-GMO conspiracy theorists to use Monsanto’s past actions to imply a “coverup” or that the science really does show that GMOs are harmful. (They aren’t.)

Germ theory denial. It’s been a depressingly short time since I’ve discussed germ theory denial, namely the claim that that microbes not the primary cause of infectious disease. As hard as it is to believe, germ theory denial exists in the age of the pandemic, with the usual claim being that it is the “terrain” (i.e., the health of the body) that determines whether one gets sick, not the microbe. While it is true that there is a germ of truth in that claim, germ theory deniers take it farther, to the point of arguing that you can somehow “turbocharge” your immune system “naturally” in order to make yourself, in essence, immune to any infectious disease. Naturally, physicians and big pharma don’t want you to know this.

     Antivaccine pseudoscience. Coming back to the antivaccine movement, again, the central conspiracy theory of the antivaccine movement is that vaccines are harmful/don’t work but that “they” are hiding/covering up/manipulating the evidence that demonstrates vaccines’ harm and ineffectiveness. Again, it’s the usual cast of characters, the CDC, FDA, federal and state governments, the medical profession, and (again, of course!) big pharma who are behind the conspiracy. Indeed, there have been two major variants of the central conspiracy theory of the antivaccine movement that I’ve known since I started paying attention. The first was the Simpsonwood conspiracy theory and was promulgated by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. in 2005; the second was the “CDC whistleblower” conspiracy theory and was promulgated by Brian Hooker and Andrew Wakefield in 2014, later amplified by Andrew Wakefield and Del Bigtree in the antivaccine propaganda movie VAXXED. Both conspiracy theories claim that the CDC “manipulated” the data” in order to “hide” or “suppress” the evidence that vaccines cause autism. And don’t even get me started on the antivaccine Bill Gates conspiracy theories.

     Lest supporters of so-called “complementary and alternative medicine” (CAM), more recently rebranded as “integrative medicine” or “integrative health” think that they are immune and that many of their beliefs aren’t rooted in conspiracy theories, just take a look at some of the leading lights of the movement, such as Deepak Chopra or Mark Hyman, both of whom have engaged in conspiratorial thinking and embraced forms of pseudoscience rooted in conspiracy theories. For example, Deepak Chopra has long engaged in a form of evolution denial in which he denied that genes are deterministic that I used to write about regularly 14 years ago, the better to support his idea that the universe has “consciousness” and “purpose.” Mark Hyman, of course, co-authored an antivaccine book with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and that didn’t stop the Cleveland Clinic from hiring him to start a “functional medicine” clinic.

     One can also look at other forms of denial not related to science and see the same characteristic of having a conspiracy theory at the root. My favorite example is Holocaust denial, about which I used to write extensively back in the day. The conspiracy theory behind Holocaust denial is, of course, that the Jews (and often Communists, whom antisemites often view as more or less synonymous with Jews as having been created by “international Jewry”), who suppress/falsify/manipulate the evidence showing the Holocaust didn’t happen/killed many times fewer than 6 million Jews for their own nefarious purposes, namely control, power, and money. (Holocaust deniers even refer to the “Holocaust industry” in much the same way that quacks and antivaxxers refer to big pharma.) Unfortunately for Holocaust deniers, their motivation is very transparent. As Holocaust historian Deborah Lipstadt once described, “the real purpose of Holocaust revisionism is to make National Socialism an acceptable political alternative again”.

     Of course, then there are other forms of denial, such as the aforementioned flat earth movement, as discussed by Steve last week:

     As absurd as all this is, and as jaded as I have become about the limitlessness of human gullibility, I was surprised by the popularity of the Flat-Earth conspiracy. This is the notion that the entire scientific community, along with the aerospace and commercial airline industries, not to mention everyone with a telescope, is engaged in a multi-century conspiracy to convince the world that the Earth is roughly a sphere when in fact it is flat. This is an excellent example of how conspiracies need to become exponentially more absurd as you challenge their premises. If the Earth is flat, then it would collapse under its own gravity. So therefore – gravity must also be a conspiracy. That’s right, gravity.

     The Flat-Earth conspiracy is so grand, in fact, that it functions as an ultimate conspiracy. An ultimate conspiracy is one so large that it essentially breaks truth. If the world can be lying about something so fundamental as the shape of the planet, then you cannot believe anything. “They” can be lying about anything and everything, there is no truth, there are no facts, and you can then justify every other conspiracy because no matter how grand they are, they pale in comparison.

     But why do conspiracy theories and science denial fit together so well, hand-in-glove? Why do I argue that all science denial is conspiracy theory, when you strip away the camouflage and reveal its core? The reason is simple. Science denial, whatever the motivation for the denial, requires conspiracy theory, because of the very characteristic that Steve cites above.

     Why is the central conspiracy theory necessary for science denial?

Let’s look at some examples of science denial and ask: Why is a conspiracy necessary for each of them? It is not for nothing that evolution is considered the central theory of biology, so important is it to our understanding of life. Let’s say that you “question” evolutionary theory, that you don’t want to believe that evolution, by natural selection and other forms of selection, is the central driving force that produced the diversity of life. How, then, do you explain the fact that, a completely negligible minority aside, biologists overwhelmingly support the theory of evolution as the central organizing principle of their scientific discipline and generally don’t argue whether evolution by natural selection is critical, but rather how critical? Let’s look next at climate science. You doubt climate science and refuse to believe that humans are primarily responsible for the no-longer-gradual increase in global temperature over the last several decades? How do you explain the fact that, a completely negligible minority aside, climate scientists overwhelmingly support the hypothesis that human activity is the primary driver of global warming and generally argue not about whether human activity is driving global climate change but rather about how much and if it’s still possible to slow or stop the change in climate in time to avert catastrophe? Let’s circle back again to antivaccine pseudoscience. If you believe that vaccines cause autism, sudden infant death syndrome, infertility, alterations in your DNA, and even the death of teenaged girls (Gardasil, of course), how do you explain the fact that, a completely negligible minority aside, scientists and physicians overwhelmingly have concluded that vaccines are safe and effective and do not cause any of those problems?

     It takes a conspiracy theory, of course, to explain why experts so overwhelmingly reject your worldview, because, surely, it can’t be because you’re just plain wrong, right? Surely, the reason why nearly all the relevant experts in the relevant scientific field reject your viewpoint and beliefs and the evidence reported in the scientific literature in that field overwhelmingly rejects—or, at minimum, emphatically does not support—your beliefs is because there’s a vast conspiracy to suppress them and they are in on it. Again, surely it can’t be because you’re just plain wrong, can it?

     Of course not.

     Then, of course, besides an explanation for why science rejects your viewpoint, conspiracy theories make you the hero. Not only do you and your fellow conspiracy theorists possess “hidden knowledge” that the rest of the world does not have (or foolishly rejects), but you are the hero fighting against a vast and evil cabal seeking to suppress that hidden knowledge. I like to point to the example of someone like antivaccine activist Kent Heckenlively. As I’ve put it before, every story must have a victim, a hero, and a villain; a conspiracy theory lets someone like Mr. Heckenlively portray himself as the hero fighting the villain (big pharma, the government, etc.) for the “victims” (the “vaccine-injured” children). Indeed, Mr. Heckenlively even imagined himself Aragorn, son of Arathorn, in The Lord of the Rings, marching to the Black Gate of Mordor on a doomed mission that he didn’t expect to survive, all in order to distract the Dark Lord Sauron, so that Frodo and Sam could complete their mission. You see the same sort of fantasy in QAnon believers, who think themselves heroes “protecting the children”. It’s a powerful combination, an explanation for why your views are rejected by science and the ability to paint yourself as a hero seeking to bring to light hidden knowledge and bring down a great evil.

     It’s been argued that science denial has five characteristics:

Conspiracy theories

Fake experts

Cherry picking

Impossible expectations of what science can do or offer

Misrepresentation and logical fallacies

     More and more, I’m coming to the conclusion that the last four characteristics all flow from the first and that science denial is, at its heart, a conspiracy theory when you strip away all the other characteristics. I don’t claim to be the originator of this idea, either. I blame Mark Hoofnagle for influencing me. Of course, conspiracy theories are defined by their own characteristics, all of which apply to science denial as well.

     True believers vs. grifters

Of course, even if you accept that science denial is a form of conspiracy theory, one must accept that there are…complexities. After all, there are real conspiracies in the world. The difference between conspiracy theories and real conspiracies is that real conspiracies are not, like conspiracy theories, unfalsifiable and ever-evolving in order to remain so. Real conspiracies can be discovered and proven through standard investigational techniques used by law enforcement and journalists the world over—and have been. For example, there really was a conspiracy to bring down the World Trade Center and Pentagon by flying commercial jetliners into them in 2001; it just wasn’t the Mossad and the US government who were behind the conspiracy, as “9/11 Truth” conspiracy theorists would have you believe. The petroleum industry did conspire to cast doubt upon the climate science. Big Tobacco did conspire to deny, obfuscate, and suppress the scientific evidence linking smoking tobacco products to lung cancer and other disease. Again, some conspiracies are real. Again, the difference between a conspiracy theory and a real conspiracy is that conspiracy theories are virtually unfalsifiable and real conspiracies can be uncovered and demonstrated by standard investigative techniques.

     These examples also bring me naturally to grifters.

     Wherever you find science denial, almost inevitably you will also find grift. The antivaccine movement is a great example, with a veritable panoply of pure grifters ranging from Andrew Wakefield to Joseph Mercola to Del Bigtree to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to Dr. Paul Thomas to so many, many others that I really can’t name them all. The denial of oncology brings to mind all sorts of grifters selling alternative cancer cures, Stanislaw Burzynski being the most prominent one who comes to mind. Homeopaths, naturopaths, chiropractors, and other quacks who deny SBM very frequently have something to sell, usually supplements or some other “medical treatment” not based in science. Thus, feeding antiscience conspiracy theories is a strategy by which grifters hawk their wares.

     Similarly, those selling an ideology also take advantage of antiscience conspiracy theories, and vice-versa. In other words, many conspiracy theories are tactical – the origin of some conspiracy theories is not genuinely held erroneous beliefs, but rather they are the result of an intentional campaign of disinformation designed to produce a political or ideological end. For example, fundamentalist religious activists who view the science of evolution as a threat to their worldview and their faith, willingly stoke conspiracy theories of evolution denial. Conservative free market fundamentalists, who abhor anything that would justify a larger role for government or increased government regulation, are more than happy to spread the conspiracy theory behind climate science denial. True believers in “natural” remedies are more than happy to spread conspiracy theories about the government, big pharma, and physicians “suppressing” alternative medicine. Sometimes the converse is true, as well, with science-denying conspiracy theorists using ideology as a gateway through which those holding that ideology can be brought into the conspiracy theory. The most obvious example to which I like to point is how the antivaccine movement so skillfully co-opted conservative rhetoric of “health freedom”, “parental rights”, and hostility towards government mandates and regulations to attract conservatives to their opposition to vaccine mandates. Unfortunately it’s worked spectacularly well, leading in a political shift in the antivaccine movement to the right over the last several years and a disturbingly large number of Republican politicians pandering to antivaxxers or even being antivaccine themselves. Meanwhile, antivaxxers have been actively coordinating their activities and synchronizing their key messages in order to cast doubt on COVID-19 vaccines.

     Science denial is a conspiracy theory

     As Steve noted last week, science denial is not just a threat to SBM, but to all science and to, as he put it, “any notion of evidence, logic, facts, and reality”. The same is true of conspiracy theories. As I contemplated this post, I asked the proverbial “chicken or the egg” question: Which came first, conspiracy theories or science denial? Most likely it was conspiracy theories, which date back as far as recorded history can take us and very likely predate science. Whatever the answer, though, more and more I’m coming to the conclusion that science denial is a form of conspiracy theory and that we will not successfully mitigate science denial until we are able to understand and mitigate conspiracy theories because, even if you do not accept the proposition that all science denial is a form of conspiracy theory, it is without a doubt true that all science denial relies at least in part on conspiracy theories to support it. As we’ve seen in the COVID-19 pandemic, the conspiracy theory of science denial can have deadly consequences, consequences that, once the pandemic finally abates, will become apparent as the earth’s climate continues to warm due to human activity. Worse, as Steve also discussed, science denial has been turbocharged by social media in an unprecedented manner. Misinformation and conspiracy theories travel farther and permeate the consciousness of more people than has ever been possible for them to do before. Developing strategies to combat this tendency and bring people back to reality is arguably the existential problem of the 21st century.”

    As written by John Cook in The 5 characteristics of Scientific Denialism

posted on 17 March 2010; “A fascinating paper well worth reading is Denialism: what is it and how should scientists respond? (Diethelm & McKee 2009) (H/T to Jeremy Kemp for the heads-up). While the focus is on public health issues, it nevertheless establishes some useful general principles on the phenomenon of scientific denialism. A vivid example is the President of South Africa, Thabo Mbeki, who argued against the scientific consensus that HIV caused AIDS. This led to policies preventing thousands of HIV positive mothers in South Africa from receiving anti-retrovirals. It’s estimated these policies led to the loss of more than 330,000 lives (Chigwedere 2008). Clearly the consequences of denying science can be dire, even fatal.

     The authors define denialism as “the employment of rhetorical arguments to give the appearance of legitimate debate where there is none, an approach that has the ultimate goal of rejecting a proposition on which a scientific consensus exists”. They go on to identify 5 characteristics common to most forms of denialism, first suggested by Mark and Chris Hoofnagle:

     Conspiracy theories

     When the overwhelming body of scientific opinion believes something is true, the denialist won’t admit scientists have independently studied the evidence to reach the same conclusion. Instead, they claim scientists are engaged in a complex and secretive conspiracy. The South African government of Thabo Mbeki was heavily influenced by conspiracy theorists claiming that HIV was not the cause of AIDS. When such fringe groups gain the ear of policy makers who cease to base their decisions on science-based evidence, the human impact can be disastrous.

     Fake experts

     These are individuals purporting to be experts but whose views are inconsistent with established knowledge. Fake experts have been used extensively by the tobacco industry who developed a strategy to recruit scientists who would counteract the growing evidence on the harmful effects of second-hand smoke. This tactic is often complemented by denigration of established experts, seeking to discredit their work. Tobacco denialists have frequently attacked Stanton Glantz, professor of medicine at the University of California, for his exposure of tobacco industry tactics, labelling his research ‘junk science’.

     Cherry picking

     This involves selectively drawing on isolated papers that challenge the consensus to the neglect of the broader body of research. An example is a paper describing intestinal abnormalities in 12 children with autism, which suggested a possible link with immunization. This has been used extensively by campaigners against immunization, even though 10 of the paper’s 13 authors subsequently retracted the suggestion of an association.

     Impossible expectations of what research can deliver

     The tobacco company Philip Morris tried to promote a new standard for the conduct of epidemiological studies. These stricter guidelines would have invalidated in one sweep a large body of research on the health effects of cigarettes.

     Misrepresentation and logical fallacies

     Logical fallacies include the use of straw men, where the opposing argument is misrepresented, making it easier to refute. For example, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) determined in 1992 that environmental tobacco smoke was carcinogenic. This was attacked as nothing less than a ‘threat to the very core of democratic values and democratic public policy’.

Why is it important to define the tactics of denialism? Good faith discussion requires consideration of the full body of scientific evidence. This is difficult when confronted with rhetorical techniques which are designed to distort and distract. Identifying and publicly exposing these tactics are the first step in redirecting discussion back to a focus on the science.

     This is not to say all global warming skeptic arguments employ denialist tactics. And it’s certainly not advocating attacking peoples’ motives. On the contrary, in most cases, focus on motives rather than methods is counterproductive. Here are some of the methods using denialist tactics in the climate debate:

     Conspiracy theories

     Conspiracy theories have been growing in strength in recent months as personal attacks on climate scientists have intensified. In particular, there has been accusations of manipulation of temperature data with the result that “the surface temperature record is unreliable” has been the most popular argument over the last month. This is distracting people from the physical realities of global warming manifesting themselves all over the world. Arctic sea-ice loss is accelerating. Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets are losing ice mass at an accelerating rate. Spring is coming earlier each year. Animal breeding and migration are changing in response. Distribution of plants are shifting to higher elevations. Global sea level is rising. When one steps back to take in the full body of evidence, it overwhelmingly points to global warming.

     Fake experts

     A number of surveys and petitions have been published online, presenting lengthy numbers of scientists who reject man-made global warming. Close inspection of these lists show very few qualifications in climate science. On the contrary, a survey of climate scientists who actively publish climate research found that over 97% agree that human activity is significantly changing global temperature.

     Cherry picking

     This usually involves a focus on a single paper to the neglect of the rest of peer-review research. A recent example is the Lindzen-Choi paper that finds low climate sensitivity (around 0.5°C for doubled CO2). This neglects all the research using independent techniques studying different time periods that find our climate has high sensitivity (around 3°C for doubled CO2). This includes research using a similar approach to Lindzen-Choi but with more global coverage.

     Impossible expectations

     The uncertainties of climate models are often used as an excuse to reject any understanding that can come from climate models. Or worse, the uncertainty of climate models are used to reject all evidence of man-made global warming. This neglects the fact that there are multiple lines of empirical evidence that humans are causing global warming .

     Logical fallacies

     Strawmen arguments abound in the climate debate. Often have I heard skeptics argue “CO2 is not the only driver of climate” which every climate scientist in the world would wholeheartedly agree with. A consideration of all the evidence tells us there are a number of factors that drive climate but currently, CO2 is the dominant forcing and also the fastest rising. Logical fallacies such as “climate has changed before therefore current climate change must be natural” are the equivalent of arguing that lightning has started bushfires in the past, therefore no modern bushfire is ever started by arsonists.

Update 16 April 2012: Many thanks to Mark Hoofnagle for pointing out that the 5 characteristics of science denial didn’t originate in Diethelm and McKee’s paper but in an article written by Mark and Chris Hoofnagle. This is an article very worth reading for anyone interested in climate change and public discourse about science. Credit has been updated accordingly.”

Discussion of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, season one, episode 8; I, Robot…You, Jane, by JustDaggers

on the historical Moloch

https://mythologyexplained.com/the-demon-moloch-in-the-bible

Caliban and the Witch, by Silvia Federici

The Prague Cemetery, by Umberto Eco

on the child witch hunts in Nigeria

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/dec/09/tracymcveigh.theobserver

https://pulitzercenter.org/stories/how-nigerias-fear-child-witchcraft-ruins-young-lives

The Scientific Attitude: Defending Science from Denial, Fraud, and Pseudoscience, by Lee McIntyre

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/42068882-the-scientific-attitude

Science Denial: Why It Happens and What to Do about It, by Gale M. Sinatra, Barbara K Hofer (Contributor)

Rationality: What It Is, Why It Seems Scarce, Why It Matters, by Steven Pinker

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/56224080-rationality

The Enigma of Reason, by Hugo Mercier, Dan Sperber

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/32336635-the-enigma-of-reason

on Trump’s deadly bleach loyalty test and science denialism

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/apr/25/trump-covid-disinfectant-deborah-birx-book?CMP=share_btn_link

https://www.scmp.com/news/world/united-states-canada/article/3095096/aliens-and-reptilians-odd-beliefs-dr-stella

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-hydroxychloroquine-coronavirus-fox-news_n_5ebaffdbc5b65b5fd63dac80

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/15/donald-trump-coronavirus-response-world-leaders

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/25/donald-trump-coronavirus-disinfectant-sarcastic-tipping-point

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/revealed-leader-group-peddling-bleach-cure-lobbied-trump-coronavirus

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-task-force-disinfectant-briefing_n_6083b866e4b0ee126f66b399?ncid

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/bleach-cure-covid-mms-florida-grenon_n_60842357e4b02e74d21a108e?ncid

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/aug/03/denialism-what-drives-people-to-reject-the-truth

https://skepticalscience.com/5-characteristics-of-scientific-denialism.html

https://elemental.medium.com/how-identity-not-ignorance-leads-to-science-denial-533686e718fa

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/07/climate-change-denial-scepticism-cynicism-politics

     Other than his idol and role model Hitler, who does Trump worship? Here is some background on the historical and literary figure of Moloch:

The Demon Moloch in the Bible – The Child Devourer

Table of Contents

Who is Moloch in the Bible?

Moloch (also known as Molek or Molech), was the name of an Ammonite god to whom human sacrifices were made. The Ammonites occupied the southern part of modern Jordan and were descended from Lot, who appears in the Old Testament as the nephew of the patriarch ABRAHAM. In the Second Book of Kings, Moloch is described as the “abomination of the children of Ammon.”

Many Israelites are believed to have consecrated their children to Moloch by throwing them into the flames. It is sometimes argued that, rather than being the name of a god, Moloch refers simply to the sacrificial ritual. The children were burnt in a place called Tophet, in the valley of Hinnom, which had been built for the explicit purpose of sacrificial rituals.

The king was sometimes regarded as the son of Moloch, and the phrase “to the Molech” may have meant “for the sake or life of the king” and referred to the sacrifice of a child conceived at a sacred marriage rite. Another research suggests that Moloch may have been the god Baal-Hammon who was worshipped at Tyre and Carthage.

Moloch in John Milton’s Paradise Lost

“First MOLOCH, horrid King

besmear’d with blood of human sacrifice, and parents’ tears,

Though, for the noise of Drums

and Timbrels loud,

Their children’s cries unheard

that passed through fire

to his grim idol.”

John Milton — Paradise Lost

Such are the words of John Milton’s Paradise Lost, where the abominable being is known as Moloch, or Molech appears as a fearsome warrior of the fallen angels. Milton describes Moloch as a pro-war devil—a being who as the fiercest fighter in the war on Heaven was keen to re-engage God and his angels after Satan’s first failed attempt.

He implores Satan to equip them all with the weapons forged in hell and dictates that they must destroy God, for if they fail or if they choose not to fight given that they’d already been thwarted, then the punishment that God had in store for them would be egregious.

With this, they have nothing left to lose and so, Moloch deemed it imperative to take the fight to God… though, this was likely because he enjoyed the thrill of war so much. In the end, though, he is ultimately overruled, likely on the account that Satan recognised Moloch was more brawn than brains.

The Description of the Statue of Moloch by Gustave Flaubert

Moloch Receiving a child sacrifice

In the Salammbo by Gustave Flaubert—a historical novel about Carthage from the mid-19th century, Moloch is referred to as a god of the Carthaginians who accepted the offerings of children as worship.

Flaubert describes a statue of Moloch as being made of iron and that he possessed a pair of outspread swings. His arms were so long that they reached the ground and he had three eyes positioned on his brow. He also maintained the traditional bull’s head as frequently seen in medieval art and his head was raised as if he meant to go about barking terrible orders.

He also explains later in the novel that another statue was brought into the city centre of Carthage and that it was used to calm down a storm that had brought pouring rain. Sacrifices were made before the statue; first grain and animals were placed inside the statue but when that did not silence the rain, children were offered next.

Flaubert writes,

“The victims, when scarcely at the edge of the opening, disappeared like a drop of water on a red-hot plate, and white smoke rose amid the great scarlet colour. Nevertheless, the appetite of the god was not appeased. He ever wished for more.”

But Moloch’s appearance in John Milton’s Paradise Lost and Gustave Flaubert’s Salammbo are perhaps more fanciful takes on a being who is mentioned only a handful of times in the Bible—primarily in the book of Leviticus—where he is associated with child sacrifice.

Moloch, A Demon or A God?

Statue of Moloch God

18th century depiction of the Moloch idol (Der Götze Moloch mit 7 Räumen oder Capellen; “The idol Moloch with seven chambers or chapels”), from Johann Lund’s Die Alten Jüdischen Heiligthümer (1711, 1738).

Some have determined Moloch as a demon—which is debatable when considering the likes of the Moloch from John Milton or the medieval portrayal of Moloch that saw him depicted as a bull-headed humanoid creature. The very image of this medieval portrayal does connote a typical demon-esque vibe, where we see him frequently stretched over a fire with his hands ominously raised before a sacrificial child.

But a more traditionally biblical approach treats Moloch as not so much a demon but more of a false God—perhaps one of the Canaanite gods. But this idea has since been debated with some scholars arguing that Moloch was never actually a deity, but instead a ritual known as ‘Mlk’, which essentially meant ‘sacrifice’ in the Punic language and the surrounding Canaanite areas.

Other scholars propose that the root word ‘mlk’ also meant ‘to rule’ and that this formed the basis of Moloch’s creation, though neither of these ideas is particularly substantiated. Amongst these ideas, it has also been proposed by various scholars that ‘mlk’ translated as ‘to present’ or ‘to gift’, though there is little evidence to support these ideas.

Moloch has also been connected to the Mesopotamian deity Mlk—better known as Malik, who was associated with the Underworld as an Underworld god.

The terms Molk or Mulk were also considered to be a type of sacrifice that was again closely related to the Canaanites, but again there is little in the way of substance to fully comprehend these terms or assign them to Moloch.

But as far as the bible goes, Moloch or Molech is most certainly identified as a deity.

Moloch (Molek) in the Bible

Moloch in the Book of Kings

Solomon shown being led astray by his many wives to worship an idol

Depiction by Giovanni Battista Venanzi of King Solomon being led astray into idolatry in his old age by his wives, 1668.

We see this quite clearly in chapter 11 of the First Book of Kings where Solomon is cautioned by God not to mingle with the women of the Moabites, the Ammonites, the Edomites, the Sidonians and the Hittites, for they all worshipped different gods and they would corrupt any man who spent enough time with them.

The passage reads,

‘They were from nations about which the Lord had told the Israelites, “You must not intermarry with them, because they will surely turn your hearts after their gods.”’—1 Kings 11:2

Nevertheless, Solomon held fast to them in love. He had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray. As Solomon grew old, his wives turned his heart after other gods, and his heart was not fully devoted to the Lord his God, as the heart of David his father had been.

He followed Ashtoreth, the goddess of the Sidonians, and Molek the detestable god of the Ammonites. So, Solomon did evil in the eyes of the Lord; he did not follow the Lord completely, as David his father had done. (1 Kings 11:2-6)

King Solomon worshipping the Idol Image of Moloch

King Solomon worshipping the Idol Image of Moloch. c. 1531

Artist:

Georg Pencz

German, c. 1500-1550

So here we see that despite hearing God’s warning, Solomon could not resist marrying many of these women and making many others his concubines. Amongst them, he also married women of the Ammonites, who the bible tells us worshipped Molek, —a detestable god, and that Solomon ended up worshipping him too.

We understand that by worshipping these other gods, including the god Molek, Solomon did evil in the eyes of the Lord and for those of you who’ve been following the Biblical Stories Explained series, you’ll know that the biblical God takes polytheism as a serious slight against him.

But in any case, we are able to pinpoint the region in which Molek was worshipped; that being the region of Ammon. However, some have disputed the use of Molek here in the bible as a scribal error, where the god Milcom is proposed instead—Milcom being recognised as the region’s national god.

In any case, the bible does continue that Solomon went on to build a temple in honour of Molek. We are told,

“On a hill east of Jerusalem, Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the detestable god of Moab, and for Molek the detestable god of the Ammonites.”— 1 Kings 11:7

But these temples do not remain standing forever, for, by the time Josiah comes on the scene in chapter 23 of the second Book of Kings, we see him destroy the buildings that Solomon had made for Molek. The bible tells us,

“The king also desecrated the high places that were east of Jerusalem on the south of the Hill of Corruption—the ones Solomon king of Israel had built for Ashtoreth the vile goddess of the Sidonians, for Chemosh the vile god of Moab, and for Molek the detestable god of the people of Ammon. Josiah smashed the sacred stones and cut down the Asherah poles and covered the sites with human bones.” —2 Kings 23:13-14

We also previously see Josiah proceed to destroy the Topheth in the valley of Ben Hinnom which was used by the worshippers of Molek to sacrifice children. This appears to be confirmation from the bible that Molek was indeed a deity who required child sacrifice—something that the biblical God had always detested and condemned.

The use of fire is also mentioned here in the bible and this links in with the medieval portrayal of Molek who as mentioned is usually seen before a burning fire and a child. The bible tells us,

“Josiah desecrated Topheth, which was in the Valley of Ben Hinnom, so no one could use it to sacrifice their son or daughter in the fire to Molek.” —2 Kings 23:10

In chapter 32 of the Book of Jeremiah, we learn of God’s disgust towards the people of Israel and Judah who have engaged with both Baal and Moloch. God not only expresses his frustrations with Israel, to the point that he wants to remove it from his sight entirely but also condemns them for worshipping other deities over him. He states,

“They turned their backs to me and not their faces; though I taught them again and again, they would not listen or respond to discipline. They set up their vile images in the house that bears my Name and defiled it. They built high places for Baal in the Valley of Ben Hinnom to sacrifice their sons and daughters to Molek, though I never commanded—nor did it enter my mind—that they should do such a detestable thing.”— Jeremiah 32:33-34

So here, we see that even God is surprised by the fact that the people of Judah had even bought into the ideas of the Ammonites and that instead of turning to him for prayer, worship, guidance, or strength, they had instead turned to the likes of Molek. They had sacrificed their children to him and paid homage to a god who demanded a heavy toll in the form of their offspring’s lives.

The bible yet again paints Molek as this devourer of children, though it is interesting that God does not blame this other deity, but instead blames those who chose to adhere to him.

Moloch in the Book of Leviticus

Moloch Receiving a child sacrifice

Offering to Molech (illustration from the 1897 Bible Pictures and What They Teach Us by Charles Foster). The illustration shows the typical depiction of Moloch in medieval and modern sources.

It is in Leviticus that we see the most frequent use of Moloch and the most frequent condemnation of him where he is yet again associated with child sacrifice. We are told in chapter 18 of Leviticus

“You shall not give any of your children to offer them to Molech, and so profane the name of your God: I am the Lord.” — Leviticus 18:21

Here, readers are cautioned against giving their children to Molech and that to do so would sully their relationship with God and serve as a great disrespect to him.

Whilst still in Leviticus, we see God explaining to Moses what will happen to any man who sacrifices his child to Molech and that the man in question will surely be put to death—via stoning. God declares that he will cut the man off from his people himself—thus showing us the magnitude of this transgression, that God himself will personally see to the man’s punishment.

He also explains that if this man is not stoned and if he is allowed to walk free, then God will take vengeance upon his entire family and reckon upon those that absolved him of his sins. We are told,

“The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, ‘Say to the people of Israel, any one of the people of Israel or of the strangers who sojourn in Israel who gives any of his children to Molech shall surely be put to death. The people of the land shall stone him with stones. I myself will set my face against that man and will cut him off from among his people, because he has given one of his children to Molech, to make my sanctuary unclean and to profane my holy name. And if the people of the land do at all close their eyes to that man when he gives one of his children to Molech, and do not put him to death, then I will set my face against that man and against his clan and will cut them off from among their people, him and all who follow him in whoring after Molech.” —Leviticus 20:1-5

Going by what the bible tells us, Moloch can certainly be viewed as a pagan deity, a deity who demanded his followers to sacrifice their children to him. But according to medieval rabbinical traditions, Moloch could also have been connected to an ancient Phoenician and Carthaginian deity—a view which later evolved into viewing Molek as the ancient Semitic and or Mesopotamian gods Adrammelek and Anamelech.

In Conclusion

As previously mentioned, Molek in the bible may also have been a misinterpretation for the Ammonite God Milcom. Indeed, as we’ve discussed in today’s article, Moloch’s place as a specific deity or a particular practice as a sacrificial ritual is often contested.

One of the main reasons for this is because Moloch only appears a handful of times in the bible and whilst his description is consistent and the notion of child sacrifice is consistently associated with him, he does not appear to have any relevance outside of the bible.

He cannot be pinpointed to a specific group of people and whilst some may try to link him with various Mesopotamian gods or Canaanite deities, none appear to be certain.

April 16 2024 Whoremonger In Chief: Stormy Daniels Hush Money Trial Begins

      In the Stormy Daniels hush money trial of our former Whoremonger In Chief, Traitor Trump, a shifting constellation of evils is displayed before the stage of the world; sin and depravity, secrecy and the catch and kill system of bent journalism as subversion of our elections, criminality in service to power, and the manufacture of false identity and history as idolatry; yet the bottomless depths of Trump’s perversions and use of sexual terror neither begin nor end here.

     Beginnings are such curious things; the origins of the Trump family fortune in the trafficking of Native American women during the Klondike gold rush, which finds reflection in Trump’s use of the modeling and beauty pageant system he once owned to exploit and globally traffic teenage girls, like the crimes of his buddy Epstein but industrialized on a mass scale.

     Often have I wondered if Trump hired Stormy Daniels to prove to the world and his donors that he has normal sexual identity, in the wake of the loss of the beauty and modeling network amid exposure of his peeping at young girls, the exposure and fall of the Epstein trafficking network, of his rape of E Jean Carroll, and of his public use of his daughter from childhood as an erotic proxy. And these are only the perversions we know about.

     Imagine the family dynamics created by the kind of crimes possible when only fear and power are real and have meaning; did the Trump Patriarch commit acts including the raiding and burning of villages, abduction, and mass enslavement of women kept in chains like livestock in the Trump string of brothels over a century ago, tortured and horsewhipped into submission and sometimes exhibited like trained animals in grotesque circus acts? Here I merely question, for I was not there nor do I possess historical documents of witnesses; but how if such horrors form the basis of the Trump family crime syndicate as a multigenerational cult of sexual terror?

     When the Republicans speak of family values, this is what they really mean;  the right of a man to do anything imaginable to women as patriarchal sexual terror and the dehumanization of women authorized by theocracy.

      And remember, friends, you can always tell the secret name of a Republican; it’s their act of treason plus their sex crime.

      As I wrote of the iconic mug shot which defines the character of Traitor  Trump and the meaning of his criminal regime in our history in my post of

  August 27 2023, Behold the Monster: Trump Surrenders to Justice; Here is a Mirror of Dorian Grey wherein America may behold the monster of our soul which lives beneath the mask of normality, in the mug shot of Our Clown of Terror, Traitor Trump. Here the nadir of our atrocities, perversions, amoral nihilism, degenerate brutality and atavisms of animal instinct glare back at us with the malign and savage rage of a baboon, and like Nietzsche’s Abyss we must beware lest our shadow capture us in the mirror of its gaze.

      Half our nation remains under its spell, while those still free mock and poke the beast with a stick. Trump has surrendered to justice with no mass protests by loyal followers despite his threats and plots of coup, terror, and civil war, and we rejoice in his pathetic diminishment and humiliation, yet the danger has not passed.

     Both the Fourth Reich which has infiltrated the state and Trump as its figurehead are still fundraising off of hate speech, possess a largely intact and unimpeded propaganda network, and control not only the Republican Party but also much of the state through their agents in the legislative and judicial branches of government as well as its security services.

     In this moment, under the glare of the police photographer’s lights, the orders of a judge, and the scrutiny of history, Trumps thinks of himself as a doomed king at bay, like King Kong, a film which is an allegory of fascism as a flawed response to the fall of civilization from the mechanical failures of its internal contradictions, an American version of the Wagnerian end in fire with which Hitler was obsessed and ended in his suicide in an underworld labyrinth. 

     What remains to be determined is whether America sees Trump as its tragic savior, cast in the part of Cyrus the Great in a myth of Exile as our new faith of QAnon has him, and chooses to fall with him and bring two thousand years of democracy as a dream of liberty and equality crashing down into fascist tyranny.

     While most of us are hoping that being sent to prison for treason and espionage will remove the threat of a second Trump Presidency, many among the Party of Treason, Patriarchal Theocracy, and White Supremacist Terror will and are using the indictments and lawsuits to escalate commitment among those already decided, and abandoning overtures to swing voters and independents in recognition of a totally polarized political and cultural moment wherein few persuadable voters remain. After all, prison did not prevent Trump’s role model Adolf Hitler from becoming the Fuhrer; why should it derail rather than help Trump’s capture of the state and subversion of democracy?

     Why is it cute and adorable when Jenna Ortega does the Kubrick Stare as Wednesday Addams, and repulsive when Trump does it? Wednesday doesn’t drop her chin to present glowering menace, a pose Trump carefully copies from Jack Nicholson in The Shining because he intends it as a threat and a demonstration of power; Jenna’s Wednesday faces us directly as total openness and honesty, a Nietzschean yes to life, to its horror and depravity as well as its exaltation and beauty, which denies nothing; an Otherness which accepts and affirms all otherness as equal. She challenges us to risk saying yes to ourselves and those truths written in our flesh; while Trump desires only our subjugation. Herein is the true difference between the Democratic and Republican Parties.

       What does Trump’s mugshot and the polarized reactions to it tell us about America and the moment we now live in? As written by Chris McGreal in The Guardian, in an article entitled Belligerence and hostility: Trump’s mugshot defines modern US politics; “Mugshots define eras.

     Bugsy Siegel peering malevolently from beneath his fedora in a 1928 booking photo summed up the perverse romance of gangsters in the prohibition age.

     Nearly half a century later, mugshots of David Bowie, elegantly dressed but dead-eyed after his arrest for drug possession, and a dishevelled Janis Joplin, detained for “vulgar and indecent language”, spoke to the shock waves created by 1960s counterculture.

     Now comes what Donald Trump Jr described as “the most iconic photo in the history of US politics” before the booking picture of his father glaring into the camera was even taken. But whether deeply divided Americans view the first ever mugshot of a former president as that of a gangster or a rock star is very much in the politics of the beholder.

     Trump’s hostility shines through as he turns his eyes up toward the camera above him and in his taut, downturned mouth as he is booked into the Fulton county jail on charges of trying to steal the 2020 presidential election. Dressed in a blue suit, white shirt and red tie, he makes no attempt to put on a smile like some of his co-defendants in their mugshots.

     The picture does not flatter but it does convey the message many of Trump’s supporters want to hear – belligerence.

     The six-pointed star of the Fulton county sheriff’s office badge and the name of the sheriff, Patrick Labat, sits in the top left hand corner of the picture. But some will be disappointed that Trump is not seen in the classic pose holding a board in front of his chest with his name and date of arrest.

     Still, the mugshot will now enter the pantheon of famous-name booking photos, alongside Frank Sinatra looking unperturbed after his arrest in 1938 for “carrying on with a married woman”, and Hugh Grant after he was found with a sex worker on Sunset Boulevard. Trump has some way to go to catch up with the American actor Lindsay Lohan’s eight-year run of mugshots for theft, drugs and driving offences.

     The former president’s supporters are already embracing the booking photo as a badge of honour and defiance. It will be held up as evidence that their man will not give up the fight against a system his followers see as ever more determined to bring him down and prevent him returning to the White House.

     Far-right congresswoman Lauren Boebert led the way with a tweet proclaiming: “Not all heroes wear capes.”

     The president’s detractors, on the other hand, will see the booking photo as evidence that even a man who was once the most powerful person in the land cannot escape the might of the justice system. Some will welcome anything that makes him look even a little bit more criminal as a confirmation that sooner or later he is going to prison. The accused may be presumed innocent until a plea or a jury says otherwise but mugshots can have a way of conveying guilt.

     For Trump though, the picture is likely to prove yet another money spinner. Within hours, his campaign fundraising website was advertising T-shirts, bumper stickers and coffee mugs glorifying a martyred Trump with the booking photo above the words “never surrender!”. Sales are likely to be brisk given the enthusiasm with which the former president’s supporters now treat each public humiliation as an accomplishment.

     Two impeachments and four sets of indictments, from financial fraud to a slew of charges over the 2020 election, have done little to damage Trump’s standing among the true believers, and have only bolstered his run for the Republican presidential nomination. Such is the strength of that belief that a recent CBS poll showed Trump voters trust him more than their own family members and religious leaders.

     Ordinary Americans have already got creative in response to the flood of indictments by mocking up pictures of the former president in an orange jump suit a la Guantánamo prison and in printing T-shirts with Trump in various states of detention with slogans declaring “Trumped up charges”, “Guilty AF”, “Guilty of winning” and “Legend”.

     There will be plenty who will challenge Don Jr’s claim that the mugshot has instantly become the most iconic photo in US political history. Pictures of John F Kennedy’s assassination or Martin Luther King Jr leading the march for freedom or a host of other historic moments will surely prove more enduring.

    But as with the gangsters and rock stars, Trump’s booking photo may come to define an era – one of unusual political turmoil that has yet to resolve whether his next mugshot is as an inmate.”

      What would Trump’s imprisonment mean for the future? As written by Martin Kettle in The Guardian, in an article entitled America on trial: the charges against Trump will decide the fate of a nation; “History teaches us few wider lessons. But there are rare exceptions. One of these is that for a nation to put its former leaders on trial is never straightforward. Although such cases are rare, when they do occur they frequently involve the pushing of pre-existing legal boundaries and the reshaping of constitutional norms and assumptions. The evolution of the doctrine of crimes against humanity after the Nuremberg trials in 1945 is the most significant modern example of this.

     Both at the time they occur and subsequently, the arguments that surround trials of this kind are almost inescapably political to a significant degree. That was true of the trial and execution of Charles I in 1649, an event that divided England then; and some of those divisions of the 17th century can still be felt today. But it will unquestionably also be true of the trials of the former US president Donald Trump, of which the latest step is due to be taken in Atlanta on Thursday.

     It is important to see that this stubborn political reality applies just as much in the Trump cases as in Charles I’s. In part, this is because many will go out of their way to deny it. Trump’s prosecutors – and many of his political critics – will undoubtedly argue that Trump is simply a defendant like any other, and that their cases are designed to show that no one, not even a former president and commander-in-chief, is above the law. They will be adamant that this is not a political trial, and that it is not Joe Biden’s revenge.

     In some very fundamental senses, they are right about that. The law is not being altered in order to prosecute Trump. The investigations have followed long-established rules. The verdicts are not foregone conclusions. This is neither a witch-hunt nor a show trial. Yet, however true these points and however honourably such claims are made, they cannot be quite the whole story. The two cases are very different, yet in both 1649 and 2023, the indictments against the king and the president take a stand on behalf of a conception of the nation against a leader set on subverting it.

     Four separate cases against Trump are now on course for trial. The first three sets of allegations cover: falsification of business records in the Stormy Daniels hush money case; withholding of classified federal documents in his Florida home; and attempting to prevent the US Congress from validating Biden’s 2020 election. This week’s case alleges that Trump tried to interfere with the counting and validation of Georgia’s vote for Biden. All four cases are due in court in the first half of 2024, before the presidential election in which Trump aims to be a candidate.

     All of these cases also contain multiple allegations. Two – the Florida document cases and the US Congress case – will be heard in federal courts. The others have been brought at state level by New York and Georgia. All the charge sheets are extremely detailed. In the documents case, for instance, the indictment now stretches to 60 pages, with Trump facing 40 separate charges. In the 6 January case, the indictment stretches to another 45 pages, and centres on four separate charges.

     Like it or not, though, these carefully crafted cases take the US into new legal territory. That is not simply because Trump is the first serving or former American president in the nation’s history to face criminal charges. Nor is it even because, being Trump and still running for office, he will treat the courtroom as a political platform. It is also because a large number of the charges, and the way in which the judges and juries will be asked to test them, relate umbilically to his roles as head of state and upholder of the constitution. These cases are a test of the constitution and, in the broadest sense, of the nation.

     All of these points repeatedly echo aspects of cases from the past. The Trump cases are still, in the end, an attempt to hold a past leader to account and judge him for the way he handled his office. That was also what the cases against earlier rulers were ultimately about too. The indictments against Charles I for his “crimes and treasons” or against Louis XVI of France for having “plotted and formed a multitude of conspiracies to establish tyranny in destroying liberty” are maybe not a world away from those against Trump, after all.

     Nor is it a world away from the much more recent example of Marshal Philippe Pétain’s trial for treason after the liberation of France in 1945. Pétain was charged with treason for his role as head of the collapsing French government in 1940, when he signed an armistice with Hitler’s invaders, and then as head of the puppet Vichy regime that collaborated with the Germans until the allied victory in 1945. Pétain was tried and convicted in Paris that same summer. His death sentence was immediately commuted to life imprisonment by Charles de Gaulle.

     As described in Julian Jackson’s masterly recent book, France on Trial, the Pétain case has many differences from those facing Trump, but also some similarities. Pétain was put on trial after a war, not an election. His was an unashamedly political trial. The jury was stacked against him, and the outcome a foregone conclusion.

     But at the same time it was also the trial of a nation, its recent history, its dilemmas and its sense of itself. It was, in the end, a moment of catharsis for postwar France. It was a trial that had to happen, and it was vitally important for the future of France that the former leader in the dock was not acquitted. For all the many differences between the two cases, the exact same applies to the US on the eve of the Trump trials.”

      Who is Donald Trump? Glowering, feral, with the dead eyes of a cornered but dangerous animal, his fake blond hair, fake history of success, and fake identity? Traitor Trump has been the cuckoo in our nest, ambush predator and pathological liar, rapist and enemy agent, worshipper of Moloch, Demon of Lies, and disciple of Adolf Hitler.

     As I wrote in my post of August 7 2019, Psychopathy and the Nature of Evil: the Parallel Cases of Donald Trump and Adolf Hitler; How are monsters created, and how does evil arise as a shaping force which grants them the power to change the topography of human souls and the course of history?

     While sorting through Trump’s tweets and speeches by keyword looking for answers, I was reminded of another such project, the now-classic study of Adolf Hitler from his speeches and writings, The Psychopathic God by Robert G. L. Waite, which I read enthusiastically the year of its publication while a junior in high school. I had just finished reading Jerzy Kosinski’s novel The Painted Bird, which led me to an interest in the origins and consequences of evil, the route by which I developed a serious interest in psychology and its intersections with history, philosophy, and literature.

     The parallels between Hitler and Trump are amazing and instructive, both in terms of the personal and political origins, shaping forces, and consequences of madness and evil.

     Dr Justin Frank’s book Trump on the Couch is an excellent resource, particularly illuminating on Trump’s erotic relationship with his daughter, the fantasies of violence and power which are rooted in his childhood relationship with his tyrannical and abusive father, and his inability to love or empathize with others as a result of his abandonment by his mother.

      Pathological lies, poor impulse control, and grandiose fantasies and delusions complete the picture of a narcissistic personality and psychopathic predator.

     I’ve said it as a joke, but its quite true; how do you spell Trump? Treason, Racism, Untruth, Misogyny, Predator.

    Actually, Donald Trump is very easy to understand, because literature provides a ready portrait of him in Frankenstein’s monster, which I have described in my celebration of Mary Shelly and her luminous novel as the figure of an abandoned and tormented child, “a vessel of rage and vengeance, with the merciless iron will to enact subjugation of others in their turn, terrible and pathetic and with the grandeur of a tortured defiant beast trapped in the same flesh as the innocent who needs to be loved and cannot understand why he seems monstrous to others.”

     How Trump’s particular madness is expressed in our national policy is a horror which can described with precision; his fear of contamination and faecal fixation translate into his signature campaign against nonwhite others and a policy of ethnic cleansing and racist state terror, his misogyny into a patriarchal wave of legal disempowerment of women’s reproductive rights, his fragile ego,  identity confusion, and narcissistic need for attention into a governance of Nuremburg-like rallies, the cultivation of despicable autocrats, and the obsessive vengeance against anyone who refuses to offer adoration and submission.

     Above all what unites Trump and Hitler as parallel figures and historical forces is the theory of politics as theatre of cruelty and government as performance art.  

     As I wrote in my post of June 9 2023, We Celebrate the Indictment of Traitor Trump, Russian Spy and Most Effective Enemy Agent Ever to Attack America, For Espionage in the Theft of State Secrets; How do you spell Trump? Treason, Racism, Untruth, Misogyny, Predator.

      Take a moment to savour with me the indictment of Trump for the crime of espionage. Ahhh, the bliss.

      A commentator on MSN’s Eleventh Hour this night pronounced the magic words which I hope will awaken our nation from the long nightmare of capture by the Fourth Reich; “I think Trump is done.”

     It has been a fairytale from which we may learn many kinds of morals, a story which begins in the 1980 capture of the Republican Party by Jerry Falwell’s Moral Majority movement as a fundamentalist theocracy and the Presidency of its figurehead Ronald Reagan, and found its true form in the Presidency of a pedophile rapist and Russian agent who for years slept with a copy of Hitler’s Mein Kampf on his nightstand in place of a Bible.

      Here in the trial of Traitor Trump is a morality play which is also a Rashomon Gate of our possible futures, for it is more than a legal last stand of the rule of law and the idea of democracy in America against a rigged electoral process which offers capture of the state to its enemies, but also a trial of democracy in America and of our infiltrated and subverted justice system whose court of ultimate appeal is a Supreme Court which is become a whorehouse.    

      What is the meaning of the Trump regime in the story of America and our future possibilities of becoming human as a free society of equals?

           As I wrote in my post of November 3 2020, One Hundred Years of Racist Vote Suppression and White Supremacist Terror: Anniversary of the Ocoee Massacre; This election has seen attempts at vote suppression unknown in our lifetimes; Trumps mission to subvert democracy includes intimidation by calling for armed white supremacists to deny nonwhite citizens access to the polls, an attack on Biden’s campaign caravan by the Trump Train mobile force, failed assassination attempts against Biden and other political figures, sabotage of the postal system, politization of the Justice department, and his farcical declaration of victory before the vote is counted, among his many treasonous crimes.

     Today liberty and tyranny play for the soul of America and the freedom of the world.

    I spent some time today at a Trump rally trying to defuse a hate crime in the making. A hey rube went up that a rally staged between our local mosque here in Spokane and a Middle Eastern grocery was becoming a violent mob; while others responded as a protection detail and placed themselves with great courage between potential perpetrators and their victims, I blended into the rally to assess and shape its development as an incubator of violence and work to defuse it through dialog and negotiation.

      Today these angry young men chose not to allow fear, rage, and hate to master and dehumanize them, nor provoke them into violence which would be the ruin of their lives; what will all of the other angry young men choose tomorrow?

     I’d like to believe this incident is atypical and not being played out a thousand times over across America; but I wouldn’t bet on it.

     Tyranny weaponizes overwhelming and generalized fear as an instrument of subjugation. This we must resist, but unless we speak directly to those fears we cannot heal the divisions of our society which authority has so skillfully manipulated.

    In the words of Sigmund Freud, “Civilization begins when we throw words instead of stones.”  Sadly, we humans have often chosen stones when words would serve us better.

    In all the madness of this election and of the deranged perversions and assaults upon our liberty, equality, truth, and justice of our Clown of Terror, Traitor Trump’s kleptocracy of state terror and tyranny, we must not forget that though he exploited the flaws of our society to orchestrate the Fall of America and of democracy throughout the world, he did not originate them.

     Trump has revealed, tested, and hammered at our flaws, yet we remain unbroken and unconquered. This we should celebrate; in the main we are voting and not shooting, because our faith in one another and in the ideals on which our society is founded remain intact, though the institutions of our government may need radical and revolutionary change.

     Nor is there anything new in the threat to democracy of vote suppression; today is the one hundred year anniversary of the Ocoee Massacre, the most terrible incident of racist vote suppression in the history of our nation since the Civil War. What may give us hope now that failed us then is the emerging consensus of racial equality and the mass coalition for racial justice won for us by the Black Lives Matter movement and the heroic citizens who have seized the streets of our cities in an unparalleled months long mass action.

      Regardless of the election results, anyone who wishes to actually govern must do so at the head of these protests and not barricaded against the will of the people. This is the true meaning of this years seizure of power by our citizens, and it is a genie which cannot be returned to the prison of its lamp, for each of us is now a Living Autonomous Zone.

      As I wrote in my post of November 5 2020. Trump’s Last Coup Attempt and Subversion of Democracy as His Ship of Fools Sinks in Pathetic Failure; As Trump’s Ship of Fools comes apart at the seams and sinks beneath the waves in pathetic failure, our Clown of Terror collapses in infantile tantrums and tries to take democracy down with him, a final gesture of madness and idiocy in his delusional quest to subvert our values and institutions of liberty and seize tyrannical power.

     We must never forget how close we came to a repeat of the 1933 German Federal Election that set Hitler on the path to a tyranny of absolute power; this is clearly the most important electoral event in the history of humankind since then, and the two elections are terrifyingly parallel. Trump tried three times to use the Black Lives Matter protests to create fear and legitimize the federal occupation of America under the pretext of re-establishing law and order in an exact duplication of Hitler’s successful strategy using the Reichstag Fire, and failed.

     We have escaped the jaws of the Fourth Reich which have held us fast for four years, since the Stolen Election of 2016, while Trump and his cabal of Gideonite fundamentalist patriarchs, white supremacist terrorists, and plutocratic robber barons have violated everything about America which is noble and true, plundered the public wealth, dehumanized and divided us, sabotaged and subverted the institutions of our freedom, equality, truth, and justice, betrayed our allies and emboldened our foes, lost the American hegemony of global power and privilege and our position as a guarantor of democracy and universal human rights and a beacon of hope to the world.

     Let us never forget the bottomless depravities, treasons, and amoral predation and greed of Trump’s many enablers and conspirators in the Fall of America as we struggle in the years ahead to reclaim our nation and our souls. We must hold them to account, but we must also reimagine our society and the many systemic and structural flaws by which we came to this broken and lost state.

      As I wrote in my post of June 9 2022, The Greatest Show on Earth: Presenting the January 6 Committee; Tonight our puppets will dance upon the stage of history and our imaginations, while a chiaroscuro of light as truth and democracy versus darkness as fascist tyranny and falsification, lies, illusions, rewritten histories, alternate realities, conspiracy theories and propaganda play for the kingdom of our souls and the fate of America and the world.

     Who do we want to become, we humans? A free society of equals or a prison planet of masters and slaves?

     Now begins a great Reckoning, and we shall see.

     As I wrote in my post of February 10 2021, Treason, Tyranny, and Terror on Trial: As the Second Impeachment of Traitor Trump Begins, I Submit Charges Before the People’s Tribunal of Crimes Against Humanity for Which Trump and His Collaborators Should Now Be On Trial;  Among the many crimes against humanity for which Traitor Trump and his collaborators should be on trial but are not yet include the genocide and ethnic cleansing of Mexican and other nonwhite migrants, the concentration camps at our border, the orphaning and torture of children, and the state tyranny and terror of fascist and racist violence as national policy perpetrated by the ICE and Border Patrol components of Homeland Security, forces of repression which are racist and antidemocratic by their nature and which should be abolished as a top priority of the Restoration of America.

    Just as villainous and reprehensible is the parallel program of racist police violence and the carceral state to re-enslave Black American citizens and enforce systemic forms of inequality and injustice through state terror, repression of dissent, the force of a militarized police and the counterinsurgency model of policing which has transformed our security services into an army of occupation with primarily political objectives, and the control of pervasive and endemic surveillance and propaganda, lies, illusions, and subversions of the truth.

     Our Clown of Terror, Traitor Trump, and his circus of fools, degenerates, and barbarians, his enablers and collaborators both within the government and his shadow forces rallying under the Confederate flag to bring violence and insurrection to our nations capital and to the streets of our cities throughout America, are co-conspirators and instigators in the murders of every Black American killed by police shooting or other racist violence since its authorization by Trump in the wake of Charlottesville.

      And every missing child kidnapped by the state and disappeared into what abominable slavery or human trafficking designed in the diseased imagination of Trump and his Epstein buddies we know not of, every migrant of the huddled masses yearning to be free who died in the quest to reach the safety of America because the water caches had been intentionally sabotaged by criminals in the uniform of our nation who were “just following orders” like their counterparts in the SS during the Holocaust, every prisoner who died in custody because they were denied water or medical care; the blood of these and countless other victims of Trump’s narcissistic self-aggrandizement and regime of fascist corruption, racism, and patriarchal sexual terror is on the hands of every  Republican who voted for him and fails now in this trial to repudiate him publicly and renounce his works as among those of the devils which he serves.

     For in his actions Trump has been not only a foreign agent and Putin’s puppet whose mission is the subversion of democracy and the Fall of America, but also a slave of Moloch the Seducer, Demon of Lies, in that he is not merely a pathological liar but also an idiot madman who cannot distinguish truth from lies, and who has weaponized his delusions and psychopathy as instruments of our falsification and subjugation in his quest for tyrannical power.

     The bizarre and lurid dark fairytales of the QAnon conspiracy theory movement, like the charges of the Inquisition and the Nazis which othered witches and Jews on which QAnon is constructed, serves as deflection from Trump’s loathsome perversions and sexual terrorism. What terrors did he conceal behind the beauty pageant and modeling syndicate he once controlled?

     His Stop the Steal campaign is a similar deflection which shields him from inquiry into the Stolen Election of 2016 and the fact that his Presidency was entirely illegitimate and due to Russian interference; it was also the rhetorical and organizational basis of his final attempted coup on January 6, for which he is now being impeached for the second time.

     We must cast out the monsters from among us, the racists and white supremacist terrorists, the Gideonite fundamentalists and patriarchs of Christian Identity fascism and sexual terror, and the amoral forces of repression of those who would enslave us and who enforce hegemonies of elite power and privilege and hierarchies of exclusionary otherness armed with guns and badges and the authority of a government which has been infiltrated by the Fourth Reich, an implacable and relentless enemy which has come just short of seizing us in its jaws.

     We must give fascism no second chances.

     As I wrote in my post of January 11 2021, Allegories and Symbols of the Fall of America: the January 6 Insurrection as Theatre of Cruelty; Here is an expanded version of my post of January 6 on the Surrealist film Gummo as a satire of the Deplorables who committed treason and armed insurrection against our nation at the command of Our Clown of Terror, Traitor Trump; on Insurrection Day, I offer for your consideration the film Gummo, a sensitive and elegant documentary of the Deplorables from whom the Fourth Reich cadre who staged the assault on Congress were recruited, and an allegory of America.

        Bacon? Stapled to the wall, a strip of bacon captures ones attention as a symbol of degeneration and barbarian atavisms of instinct. Werner Herzog signposted it for our attention, and it persists as a symbol of degeneration to an animal state, like a trophy of wealth which is also offal above a bathtub filled with filth as our young protagonist eats spaghetti, his mouth smeared with red like a cannibal; an unforgettable image of the fallen American Dream.

      It is the little things which disturb, provoke, and incite us to challenge normality, the tyranny of other people’s ideas of virtue, the authorized identities of hegemonic elites and divisions of otherness, and to transgress the boundaries of the Forbidden with glorious sins of beatification.

     Here as always, all true art defiles and exalts.

     We dine in filth on the carrion of others lives and by their labor. This is a Surrealist film intended as an allegory of America and a thematic interrogation of our flaws and dark legacies of injustice, and in large part restates Nietzsche’s critique of Shakespeare’s Measure For Measure and the idea of the innate depravity of man, an extension of the doctrine of original sin, on which all our law is based, as Nikos Kazantzakis argues in his thesis Friedrich Nietzsche on the Philosophy of Right and the State, an anarchist analysis of authority as dehumanization which underlies all his later work.

     So also does the film restate William S. Burroughs’ analysis of capitalism and imperialism as the Algebra of Need, in which drug addiction becomes a metaphor of our addiction to wealth, power, and privilege, an engine of self-destruction, commodification, and dehumanization which feeds on and worsens our most atavistic instincts. Here the flaws of our humanity, fear and rage, vanity and jealousy, the need to dominate and control, become the instruments of our subjugation to hegemonic elites through divisions of exclusionary otherness and to tyrants of force and control and the imperial and carceral states of those who would enslave us.

     The film itself is brutally shocking, grotesque, and borders on the obscene; which is why I adore it so. I must warn you that while I like it as an allegory of America’s flaws, and to poke fun at Trump’ s followers, this is brutal and depressing; anyone with suicidal ideation should avoid it. This debut of a heralded wonder of the new age as director was not understood as a critique of state power as a force of dehumanization and regression to an animal state, like that of the Deplorables, and unjustly derailed a promising career; a historical injustice I would like to redeem, because Gummo is a film we need now.

     We must see the enemies of Liberty as they truly are, if we are to heal our nation from the primary trauma of fracture they enacted in the January 6 Insurrection.

     Both the Insurrection and the film Gummo, like the Trump presidency as a whole, must be interpreted as performances of the Theatre of Cruelty as articulated by Antonin Artaud in his manifesto The Theatre And Its Double. Trump is a figure of the mad emperor from his great novel Heliogabalus; or, the Crowned Anarchist; his performances as a clown of terror, disruption, and sadism were also brilliantly prophesized by Robert Coover in The Public Burning, A Political Fable, written as a satire of Nixon.

    Let us see beyond the lies and illusions with which Trump and his Deplorables conceal their subversions of democracy, sabotage of our institutions, and violations of our ideals of liberty, equality, truth, and justice.

     Always pay attention to the man behind the curtain. As Dorothy says to Oz, he’s never anything but “just an old humbug.”

     As I wrote in my post of February 11 2021, Profiles in Treason and Terror; The dishonorable and the mad, the delusional and the sadistic epicures of brutality and perversions, the feral predators hooting and champing before the gallows and guillotines they have brought to murder members of congress with and their partners in uniform unleashing racist terror and gun violence in the streets, and the amoral and predatory grifters and puppetmasters of fascism who have subjugated and enslaved them and stolen their honor and their souls; these are among the idolators of Traitor Trump who conspired, enabled, and collaborated in his plot to subvert democracy and overthrow America in the January 6 Insurrection which attempted to seize Congress and execute its members, which like Hitler’s Beer Hall Putsch on which it was modeled was intended to decapitate the government of the people in a single stroke.

     As details emerge of the internal operations and massive scale of the plot against America, in terms of its central coordination and logistics under direct operational command of Trump and his cabal of conspirators, we are offered not only the spectacle of his aberrance and monstrosity as a mad idiot Clown of Terror drooling and gloating in bestial depravity at the destruction of our values and institutions, the violation of our ideals and the endless suffering he has caused, but of those of his freakish and degenerate followers as well.

     The role of deniable forces of the Fourth Reich such as the Proud Boys, the Oathkeepers, and other organizations of white supremacist terror, and of their partners and infiltration agents within our police, military, and security services,  in the January 6 Insurrection is by now well documented and will become more so as the greatest manhunt in our history exposes and entraps more of its perpetrators.

     The images we have been witnessing of their assault on liberty during the Second Impeachment trial will be remembered in the history of the world as the true legacy of an era of fascist tyranny under the figurehead of Trump which nearly ended America as a guarantor of global democracy and universal human rights, and had we fallen as the primary domino and a beacon of hope to the world both democracy and human rights would be lost to humankind for unknown ages; the last time civilization fell it took a thousand years for the idea that government derives its authority from its citizens and not by divine right, the idea that no one of us is better than any other by right of birth, and that freedom, equality, truth, and justice are the foundational values of our society and truths of human being and meaning, to reawaken.

     And it took centuries of wars and revolutions to do so; how if this time civilization falls not to hordes of barbarians seeking nothing but pillage and destruction, but to regimes of totalitarian force and control?

     This is the great contradiction of the forces of repression and subjugation to authority which overran our capitol on January 6; they have been betrayed by their masters in believing they were acting to restore our traditional values and civilization, when in fact they had been weaponized in service to its destruction. Here is a clear and present danger, but also an opportunity; shared motives can be redirected to heal divisions, for they too want an American Restoration. As yet we just disagree on our definition of terms.

     When fear is overwhelming and generalized, it can be shaped through submission to authority by lies, illusions, alternate realities, especially when pervasive and endemic surveillance, big data, and propaganda are available as instruments of state control. Authority achieves submission through falsification and the theft of the soul, but this is also the weakness of control which cannot stand against truth, just as the weakness of force is that it is powerless against resistance, disobedience, and refusal to submit.

    The election of Biden and Harris, the failure of Trump’s sixth coup attempt on January 6, and the public exposure and shaming of his co-conspirators, collaborators, and enablers before the stage of the world of the Second Impeachment trial; in these events we have witnessed a turning of the tide from fascism to a restoration of democracy.

     Once the Reckoning has been achieved, the Restoration must heal our divisions; and this means we must embrace and transform the fear that lives at the heart of hate, and drives the rage, violence, and need to conquer and dominate others which shadows our historical inequalities and injustices.

    Fear, Power, Force; such is the Ring of Power which enslaves us, and which we must abandon if we are to become whole.

     Herein I offer a previous version of the role of Trump as Angelo in the savage morality play Measure For Measure, a work luminous with Kafka-esque Absurdism, Freudian horror, and a brilliant interrogation of the dynamics of patriarchy and power asymmetry in gender relations in the brilliant review of the Simon Godwin production, critiqued with marvelous insight by Geoffrey O’Brien in the New York Review of Books; entitled “Shakespeare’s Pornography of Power by Geoffrey O’Brien.

     “This is the disgusting, stinking world of medieval Vienna. The darkness of this world is absolutely necessary to the meaning of the play…When this play is prettily staged, it is meaningless—it demands an absolutely convincing roughness and dirt.” Thus Peter Brook, who directed a legendary production in 1950, on his vision of Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure. Simon Godwin’s pathway into the play at the Polonsky Shakespeare Center in Brooklyn is by way of a corridor through Mistress Overdone’s brothel, along a narrow basement path lined with discreetly closed cubicles and arrays of lubes, dildos, anal plugs, shackles and handcuffs, multicolored condoms, an inflatable sex doll. It is a space dimly lit but by no means medieval, an ingratiatingly tacky emporium more likely to amuse than repel the New York theatergoers passing through.

     Given the perennial relevance of the various injustices it circles around—the sexual exploitation and pious hypocrisy and persecution of whistleblowers—Measure for Measure invites updating. The virginal Isabella, realizing that no one will believe her story of victimization against that of the all-powerful Angelo—who has been named regent of Vienna by its absent duke—cries out: “To whom should I complain? Did I tell this, / Who would believe me?”—language so direct it could be lifted from the latest celebrity harassment trial, especially when spoken with the angry clarity that Cara Ricketts gives the line.

     Angelo—the moral disciplinarian with a spotless reputation who, once given power, swiftly succumbs to his most predatory impulses—can be envisioned almost too neatly as the sort of high-minded conservative who from time to time finds himself indicted for sexual malfeasance. There is no problem with Thomas Jay Ryan’s performance: Ryan’s delineation of Angelo’s ethical collapse and his half-hearted efforts to justify himself to himself have the barely controlled panic of a public figure realizing how little he knows himself. The regent lies, and the most unhampered truth-telling comes from sex workers and criminals who make no pretense to any credo beyond their own self-interest, as in the unarguable defense of the tapster Pompey, arrested for procuring: “Truly, sir, I am a poor fellow that would live.”

     But it’s in the nature of Measure for Measure that whatever contemporary analogies are invoked cannot quite make sense of what happens. In its early stages the play is centered on the three characters whose destinies collide so violently: Angelo, Isabella, and her brother Claudio, who has been condemned for fornication. The scenes in which they confront each other have the amplitude of the tragedies that were to follow: Isabella pleading for Claudio’s life, Angelo demanding her virginity as the price of her brother’s pardon, Claudio overwhelmed by the terror of death, Isabella (in a moment that challenges any audience’s sympathy) denouncing her brother for his weakness of character when she realizes he is willing to see her give in to Angelo’s demands.

    The grandeur of these scenes becomes most fully alive through Cara Ricketts’s Isabella, intensely focused, supremely pointed in her argumentation, but with a hint of an absolute commitment to the ideal that helps account for her harsh dismissal of her condemned brother’s terror of dying; an altogether serious person, too serious for the world she finds herself inhabiting, perhaps too serious for the madcap Duke when he proposed to her at the very end of the play. Her reaction to Angelo’s harassment goes beyond physical repulsion into profound moral contempt—expressing itself in angry laughter—at the triviality of his character. Her ultimate forgiveness of Angelo—at a moment when she still believes her brother to have been executed—is dramatically the most difficult of all, couched as it is in a nice legal argument, but Ricketts brought a somber conviction to it.

     An audience that wants to take the play as readily grasped satire cannot evade the puzzlements and reversals of judgment that come in its later scenes—reversals of judgment that do not end even when the play is done. Measure for Measure is a perpetual questioning machine, exquisitely functional, set to a relentless tempo, yet a machine that bristles and crackles in its joints with contradiction and discomfort. Harold Bloom has described it as “a comedy that destroys comedy.” It is a comedy that threatens to destroy or at least wear down its own characters by subjecting them to the only mechanism—a mechanism demanding elaborate subterfuges and unlikely changes of heart—by which they can avoid a tragic fate. By the end we might imagine them as the exhausted, socially viable remnants of those conflicted, passionate beings we saw tearing apart everything including themselves scene after scene, during the first three acts. They are saved, and some of them have saved others, but for what fate we can only wonder.

     In Godwin’s production, to emerge from the brothel’s passageway into the main theater is to find the Polonsky transformed into what looks like an oversize banqueting hall, the playing area laid out as an immense table decked with candles and balloons and trays of drinks, a few audience members seated around the edge. Drunken revelers stagger noisily across the tabletop stage, leaving behind a solitary figure sprawled on its surface, shooting up (presumably) heroin and then wrapping himself up in a tangle of sheets. A woman in business attire approaches him, studying him like a corporate assistant confronted by a messy but familiar management problem. He, it quickly emerges, is Vincentio, Duke of Vienna, and she is Escalus, the “ancient Lord” who serves him, transmuted into Escala, a tightly controlled executive who in January LaVoy’s reading sometimes evokes a less murderous version of Tilda Swinton’s scheming pharmaceuticals exec in Michael Clayton.

     As the Duke (Jonathan Cake) rouses himself from his nod he delivers the play’s opening speech, in a broken rhythm suggesting that the passage’s roundabout prolixity reflects his faltering attempt to shake himself out of his opiate daze. It is one way to get the play going: pitched forward headlong, off-balance from the start, the unanswered and perhaps unanswerable questions piling up before we even know where we are. What manner of being is the Duke really? Why is he leaving Vienna in such haste and putting in his place a temporary regent, the “precise” Angelo, known for his rigorous strictness? Why does he choose to linger, disguised as a friar, to observe what happens in his absence? Having learned that his moralistic stand-in is attempting to blackmail Isabella—a young woman just about to enter a convent—into sex in order to save her brother Claudio (Leland Fowler) from a death sentence, why does he intervene in such needlessly tortuous fashion, subjecting innocents to agonies of misinformation? When in one of the play’s most eloquent speeches he more or less persuades Claudio that life is not especially worth living—“Be absolute for death”—does he speak his own sincerest thoughts or is this merely part of the role he is playing as prison confessor?

     To cast the Duke as a junkie is one way of providing him with a motive. His addiction perhaps discourages him from exercising moral authority; perhaps he sees it as a weakness rendering him unfit to enforce Vienna’s laws with the necessary severity; perhaps he even harbors the thought that those laws are unnecessarily severe; perhaps he simply needs to take some time out. In any event his drug habit, as far as I could observe, comes up only once more (a quick glance at the track marks on his arm, lest he forget), and from the moment he dons his disguise he grows steadily more assured, though it is an assurance boosted by waves of antic humor to which Cake at times gives an almost Monty Pythonish edge. A certain hilarity gives him courage to dream up and carry out his preposterous scheme, which more and more comes to resemble a baroque sting operation.

     We can hardly expect to find out who the Duke really is in the course of the evening, since Shakespeare’s text leaves that question so hauntingly open. Even if he assures a confederate early on that he has “a purpose / More grave and wrinkled than the aims and ends / Of burning youth,” he never articulates what that purpose is. He is more than central to the play—as the narrative advances he becomes its directing force, moving plot elements around like game pieces—while remaining to the end a fascinating cipher. He is memorably termed “the Duke of dark corners”—a secret devotee of hidden vices—by the witty reprobate Lucio, but Lucio is by no means averse to making things up. If nothing else the Duke can be said to behave very much like a playwright working with improvisatory energy on his play’s last act, an act that will feature a succession of agonizingly drawn-out revelations, a string of pardons, and an unlooked-for proposal of marriage.

     The lust of the hypocritical Angelo is not triggered by the attractive power of beauty but perversely by the notion of violating purity: the pornography of power, relished by a man for whom execution and torture are primary tools of policy. There is a terror at the heart of everything. The Duke’s exhortation to Claudio to resign himself to death cannot match in dramatic effect Claudio’s subsequent speech—roughly the play’s midpoint—on the horror of dying: “The weariest and most loathed worldly life / That age, ache, penury, and imprisonment / Can lay on nature, is a paradise / To what we fear of death.”

     Sometimes the play feels like a series of decentered snapshots of city dwellers shuffling between sex and death. It is the only Shakespeare play concerned with how a city is run, and what that is like for the people who live there. (Romeo and Juliet is also a city play of sorts, but it centers on the operation of clans, not the municipal government that so ineffectively intervenes in their never-ending feud; and that play’s poetry—so unlike the gnarled, combative, often tensely legalistic exchanges of Measure for Measure—constantly evokes spaces beyond the immediate setting.) In Measure for Measure everything is local, in the most oppressive way. We look at things from the top down and from the bottom up, and the judgment is ambivalent, or rather multivalent. Godwin’s staging conveys very well the sense of airless interconnecting interiors, all linked as part of the same system: claustrophobic offices, claustrophobic cells of both prisons and convents, but mostly of prisons. It could almost be called a prison play, a point underlined here by the cell walls constantly rolling in and out of the foreground.

     The motives of the three main characters are seen from many angles, by each other and by bystanders and street-corner commentators of all sorts, from the generously inclined Provost of the prison, realized with great feeling by Oberon K.A. Adjepong, to the unavoidable Lucio, amusingly played by Haynes Thigpen as a self-satisfied comedian a little too hip for the room, always there to speak up for ordinary human vice (“a little more lenity to lechery would do no harm”) although contemptuous of the whores he sleeps with, constantly hovering at the edge of what goes on so he can get his digs in and almost managing to avoid getting called on it. The comedy provides not so much relief as an obverse view, consistently deflating and needling, and it is rarely clear where exactly the boundaries are, or who can truly be called central in this world fallen askew.

     Consider the late emergence of Barnardine, a murderer who for nine years has been awaiting execution. The Duke determines to substitute his head for that of Claudio, demanded by Angelo in proof that he has been put to death, but when Barnardine—already described as “a man that apprehends death no more dreadfully but as a drunken sleep; careless, reckless, and fearless of what’s past, present, or to come”—emerges from his cell, he simply refuses to die—“I have been drinking hard all night, and I will have more time to prepare me… I swear I will not die today for any man’s persuasion”—and staggers back to his cell. It was a disappointment to see this episode treated as a comic interlude, with too much hokum and unneeded verbal additions. (Zachary Fine did much in his other role as the simple-minded constable Elbow.)

     It’s the most surprising scene in Measure for Measure and ought to stop the proceedings in their tracks, with its after beat the Duke’s astonishing pardon of the murderer in the last act. I can still recall being taken to see John Houseman’s production of the play at age eight—a memorable outing to the Shakespeare theater in Stratford, Connecticut in 1956—and however dimly I apprehended its stew of bawdry and sexual extortion, there was no mistaking the uproarious force of Barnardine’s unconditional refusal. The actor was Pernell Roberts, of later Bonanza fame, and he must have delivered Barnardine’s few lines with great vigor, since the scene has lingered in memory ever since. In a play of punitive laws, complex masquerades, and tortuous mutually annihilating arguments, it briefly upholds the intoxicating possibility of simply walking away.”

     As I wrote in my post of June 15 2022, Act Three of the Greatest Show on Earth: Where Do We Go From Here?;  Where do we go from here?

      Democracy in America survived its most terrible moment of peril from internal threat in the January 6 Insurrection, yet here we are, witness to the public exposure of the plot and its treasonous conspirators on television as Congress brings a Reckoning to the Fourth Reich.

      Like the Beer Hall Putsch of 1923 on which it was modeled, it failed; but in doing so also achieved all of its strategic goals, moving our great enemy nearer to victory by staging a Lost Cause which established the fascist counternarrative as iconography that Trump remains our legitimate President. Next time, and there will always be a next time, we may not be so lucky.

      Not only do the forces of fascism remain an active threat, through open allegiance to the Lost Cause which echoes horrifically with that of the Confederacy and the KKK whose adherents are among the networks of deniable assets now among us as they were at the Capitol on that fateful day, but the vast resources of wealth and power at their command after seventy years of infiltration of global elites and governments remain undiminished.

      But none of this is relevant to the true threat which fascism poses to us all today; for America has been divided against itself, and as we are warned by Abraham Lincoln in 1858 in his House Divided speech in reference to the synoptic Gospels of Luke 11:17, Mark 3:25, and Matthew 12:25; “If we could first know where we are, and whither we are tending, we could better judge what to do, and how to do it.

     We are now far into the fifth year, since a policy was initiated, with the avowed object, and confident promise, of putting an end to slavery agitation.

Under the operation of that policy, that agitation has not only, not ceased, but has constantly augmented.

     In my opinion, it will not cease, until a crisis shall have been reached, and passed –

     “A house divided against itself cannot stand.”

     I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.

     I do not expect the Union to be dissolved – I do not expect the house to fall – but I do expect it will cease to be divided.

     It will become all one thing, or all the other.”

      As we are taught with the lyrics of the song Where Do We Go From Here?, in Buffy the Vampire Slayer episode 7 of season 6, Once More With Feeling, possibly the greatest musical episode of any telenovela yet created;

 “Where do we go from here

Where do we go from here

The battle’s done,

And we kinda won.

So we sound our victory cheer.

Where do we go from here.

Why is the path unclear,

When we know home is near.

Understand we’ll go hand in hand,

But we’ll walk alone in fear. (Tell me)

Tell me where do we go from here.

When does the end appear,

When do the trumpets cheer.

The curtains close, on a kiss god knows,

We can tell the end is near…

Where do we go from here

Where do we go from here

Were do we go

from here?”

       Here is an elegy for the Fall of America, a hymn to a dying hope and the lost grandeur of a fallen nation. When in a distant future the artifacts of our civilization begin to puzzle whatever beings arise from our carrion, and they ask who were the Americans, I hope such music as this lamentation remains to guide their questions.

     Yet hope remains when all is lost, and whether it becomes a gift or a curse is in our hands. These lyrics speak of the modern pathology of disconnectedness, of the division and fracture of our Solidarity, of subjugation through learned helplessness and the dominion of fear. But this is not the end of the story, nor of ours.

     Once More With Feeling ends not with abjection, but with The Kiss, between the Slayer and Spike, one of the monsters she hunts. A very particular kind of monster, who is also the hero of the story in its entire seven year arc; one who is made monstrous by his condition of being and forces beyond his control, against which he struggles for liberation and to recreate and define himself as he chooses, a monster who reclaims his humanity and his soul. This is why we continue to watch the show twenty years after its debut; we are all Spike, locked in titanic struggle for the ownership of ourselves with authorized identities and systemic evils, a revolution of truths written in our flesh against imposed conditions of struggle and orders of human being, meaning, and value.

      Buffy the Vampire Slayer is an allegory of Sartrean freedom in a world without inherent value or meaning, of the joy of total freedom versus the terror of our nothingness, and above all a song of the redemptive power of love to return to us our true selves.

      This is how we defeat fascist tyranny in the long game, after we bring a Reckoning for its crimes against humanity and its subversion of democracy; let us answer hate with love, division with solidarity, fear with hope, and bring healing to the flaws of our humanity and the brokenness of the world.

The Treason Mob: Trump and His Circus of Treason

Trump’s hush-money trial: what’s happened so far?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/apr/15/trump-hush-money-trial

Who are the key players in Donald Trump’s hush-money trial?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/apr/15/key-players-donald-trump-hush-money-trial

Trump’s hush-money trial: prosecutors’ key arguments in criminal case

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/apr/15/trump-hush-money-trial-key-arguments

King Kong | Climbing Up (and Falling from) the Empire State Building

(how Trump sees himself)

Belligerence and hostility: Trump’s mugshot defines modern US politics

America on trial: the charges against Trump will decide the fate of a nation

Trump’s mugshot reviewed: ‘More like a foolish old man with anger issues than a presidential contender’ | Photography | The Guardian

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2023/aug/25/trump-mugshot-reviewed-fry-blackadder-melchett-fulton

Mugshotted, Trump’s veneer of immunity cracked. Yet his wrath is bottomless | Lloyd Green | The Guardian

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/aug/25/trump-fulton-county-jail-mugshot-republicans-2024

Trumps Kubrick Stare

Jenna Ortega as Wednesday’s Kubrick Stare, in the iconic dance with her monster

Wednesday: the first revolution in which we all must fight; the struggle for ownership of ourselves

Wednesday Addams | Inside the Character | Netflix

Buffy the Vampire Slayer Season 6 episode 7- Once More, with Feeling – Where Do We Go From Here?

Gummo film

https://vimeo.com/388834918

Lincoln’s House Divided speech

https://www.nps.gov/liho/learn/historyculture/housedivided.htm

The Public Burning, by Robert Coover, William H. Gass (Introduction)

Heliogabalus; or, the Crowned Anarchist, by Antonin Artaud

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/75887.Heliogabalus_or_the_Crowned_Anarchist

The Uncensored Picture of Dorian Gray, Oscar Wilde, Nicholas Frankel  (Editor)

The Theatre and Its Double, by Antonin Artaud

The Algebra of Need, by William S. Burroughs, Eric Mottram (Editor)

Friedrich Nietzsche on the Philosophy of Right and the State, by Nikos Kazantzakis

American Kompromat: How the KGB Cultivated Donald Trump, and Related Tales of Sex, Greed, Power, and Treachery, Craig Unger

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/55655068-american-kompromat?ref=nav_sb_ss_1_18

God’s Right Hand: How Jerry Falwell Made God a Republican and Baptized the American Right, Michael Sean Winters

A List of the Crimes of Our Clown of Terror, Traitor Trump

https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/the-complete-listing-atrocities-1-1-056

March 4 2024 Supreme Court Puts Trump, An Insurrectionist Who Conspired In the Murders of Police Officers and Attempted Hanging and Guillotining of Members of Congress, On Our Election Ballots

Our Supreme Court has today ignored the question of Trump’s treason and insurrection, and instead ruled that states cannot bar him from the ballot in a federal election on the basis of being an insurrectionist. As they well know, this moves him a step closer to the Presidency.

       Among the many flaws in our system which must be changed which Trump has demonstrated to us all include our method of choosing a President, in which we must abolish the electoral college and adopt one citizen one vote national elections without regard to residency, wherein all citizens are equal in the power of their vote, and term limits for the Supreme Court to the term of the appointing President, which would recognize its political nature. Aberrant and disgusting as Trump is, he has been useful in exposing weaknesses in our democracy.

       Now we must reimagine, transform, and bring meaningful change to our institutions, systems, and structures, and to the praxis of our values and ideals in a rapidly changing threat environment, to envision ourselves anew as a free society of equals and work together in solidarity to make it real.

       As I wrote in my post of January 9 2022, How Shall We Answer Treason?;     Disloyalty and the betrayal of trust are among the worst and most terrible of true crimes, for they signify and represent the failure and collapse of all other values and meaning. This is why Solidarity as Fraternity is among the three principles on which the Revolution is built, along with Liberty and Equality, for without them there can be no free society of equals.

     A brilliant Meidas Touch video which indicts Trump as a domestic terrorist for the January 6 Insurrection provoked me to question, How shall we answer treason? So wrote the following in reply:

     Actually, I would like to see Trump achieve his true nature by being fed to dogs and transformed into dog shit. Wouldn’t it be a lovely display in a glass case exhibited in a museum of holocausts, atrocities, and crimes against humanity? Let his monument read thus:

     Here lies Our Clown of Terror, Traitor Trump, in his true form, most terrible enemy democracy has faced since Alcibiades betrayed Athens, most dangerous foreign agent to ever attack America even including Pearl Harbor and the Twin Towers, who subverted our ideals and sabotaged our institutions, and nearly enacted the fall of civilization as the figurehead of the Fourth Reich and herald of an age of fascist tyranny and state terror.

     Yet here he lies, nothing but a pile of dog shit. Look upon the rewards of tyranny, you who are mighty, and despair.

     For we are many, we are watching, and we are the future.

     We can but wish. Beyond such fantasies, exclusion is a just balance for crimes of treason, disloyalty, and betrayal, in the forms of loss of citizenship, the most terrible punishment any nation can inflict, seizure of assets, and exile and erasure.

    To be clear, all participants in the January 6 Insurrection, and all who conspired in this crime, had knowledge aforehand but did not sound an alarm,  or acted subsequently to conceal, abet, or deny and excuse its perpetrators and its nature including all legislators who voted not to investigate it, bear responsibility in its crimes and should be repaid with loss of citizenship, seizures of assets, exile, and erasure.

     Exile as the natural consequence of treason was explored in the short story “The Man Without a Country” by Edward Everett Hale, first published in The Atlantic in December 1863.  It is a story of a traitor who comes to understand the true meaning of his crime; the renunciation of his social contract, connection and interdependence with other human beings, and membership in a national identity.

     As described in Wikipedia; “It is the story of American Army lieutenant Philip Nolan, who renounces his country during a trial for treason, and is consequently sentenced to spend the rest of his days at sea without so much as a word of news about the United States.

    The protagonist is a young US Army lieutenant, Philip Nolan, who develops a friendship with the visiting Aaron Burr. When Burr is tried for treason (that historically occurred in 1807), Nolan is tried as an accomplice. During his testimony, he bitterly renounces his nation and, with a foul oath, angrily shouts, “I wish I may never hear of the United States again!” The judge is completely shocked at that announcement and, on convicting him, icily grants him his wish. Nolan is to spend the rest of his life aboard US Navy warships in exile with no right ever to set foot on US soil again and with explicit orders that no one shall ever again mention his country to him.

     The sentence is carried out to the letter. For the rest of his life, Nolan is transported from ship to ship, lives out his life as a prisoner on the high seas, and is never allowed back in a home port.”

      So for Exile; now also for Erasure. As I wrote in my post of January 7 2021, Treason and Terror: Trump’s Brownshirts Attack Congress; This leaves the ringleader and chief conspirator of treason, sedition, insurrection, and terror to be removed from power and denied a platform from which to spread madness and violence like a plague; our Clown of Terror, Traitor Trump. I believe we must remove, impeach, deplatform, and prosecute him for his many crimes against America; Trump must be exiled from public life and isolated from his power to destroy us.

     Roman law called this damnatio memoriae, the erasure of public forgetting, and coupled with the Amish practice of shunning provides a useful model of minimum use of social force in safeguarding ourselves from threats, without the brutality of torture and prison to which we have become addicted. A fascinating  article by the classical scholar Alexander Meddings examines its use in the cases of Trump’s nearest Imperial parallels, Caligula and Nero.

     Exile and Erasure; neither prison nor violence or the use of force and fear. Let us simply cast out those who would destroy us from among us, and forget them.

      As I wrote in my post of  December 28 2023, Can States Ban Trump From Our Next Election For the Crime of Insurrection Under the 14th Amendment?;     As the wall of his immunity begins to crumble and states ban Trump from the ballot in the next elections, and the issue of whether or not states can do so is escalated to the Supreme Court that he rigged for just such a moment, Our Clown of Terror, Traitor Trump, struts in the lights of the circus he has made of our nation, howling with rage and cheerleading his adoring sycophants in barbarisms and fascist litanies of atrocities to come.

     Our election year in 2024 will be like nothing in our history, a ground of struggle not only of fascist tyranny and democracy, but of hate and love, hope and despair, solidarity and division, madness and vision, the psychopathy of power and the mutualism of a free society of equals.

     I hope what Shakespeare wrote in Henry the Fifth is still true; “When cruelty and lenity play for a kingdom, the gentler hand is the surest winner.”

     As written by Cameron Joseph and agencies in The Guardian, in an article entitled Why did Maine and Colorado disqualify Trump from their ballots?

Decisions stem from the US constitution’s insurrection clause and could have major ramifications for 2024 election; “Officials in Colorado and Maine have ruled that Donald Trump is ineligible to run for the White House again, citing his role in the January 6 attack on the US Capitol.

     In Colorado, the state supreme court ruled 4-3 earlier this month to take the former president off the state’s Republican presidential primary ballot; on Thursday, Maine’s secretary of state kicked him off the ballot there too.

    The decisions will probably have major legal and political ramifications for the 2024 election, and stem from a rarely used provision of the US constitution known as the insurrection clause.

     Trump’s campaign promised to immediately appeal the decisions to the US supreme court, which could well strike them down. Similar lawsuits are working their way through the courts in other states.

     Here’s what we know so far, and what it might mean for the former president and current Republican frontrunner.

     What is the insurrection clause and why was it used?

     The decision by the Colorado supreme court is the first time a candidate has been deemed ineligible for the White House under the US constitutional provision.

    Section 3 of the 14th amendment, also referred to as the insurrection clause, bars anyone from Congress, the military, and federal and state offices who once took an oath to uphold the constitution but then “engaged” in “insurrection or rebellion” against it.

     Could Trump be barred under the constitution’s ‘engaged in insurrection’ clause?

     Ratified in 1868, the 14th amendment helped ensure civil rights for formerly enslaved people, but also was intended to prevent former Confederate officials from regaining power as members of Congress and taking over the government they had just rebelled against.

     Some legal scholars say the post-civil war clause applies to Trump because of his role in trying to overturn the 2020 presidential election and obstruct the transfer of power to Joe Biden by encouraging his supporters to storm the US Capitol.

     “The dangers of Trump ever being allowed back into public office are exactly those foreseen by the framers of section 3,” Ron Fein, the legal director for Free Speech for People, said in a recent interview. “Which is that they knew that if an oath-taking insurrectionist were allowed back into power, they would do the same if not worse.”

     How did this happen?

     In Colorado, the case was brought by a group of voters, aided by the group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (Crew), who argued Trump should be disqualified from the ballot for his role in the 6 January 2021 riot at the US Capitol.

      Noah Bookbinder, the group’s president, celebrated the decision as “not only historic and justified, but … necessary to protect the future of democracy in our country”.

     Colorado’s highest court overturned an earlier ruling from a district court judge, who found that Trump’s actions on January 6 did amount to inciting an insurrection, but that he could not be barred from the ballot, because it was unclear that the clause was intended to cover the role of the presidency.

     A majority of the state supreme court’s seven justices, all of whom were appointed by Democratic governors, disagreed.

     In Maine, the secretary of state, Shenna Bellows, examined the case after a group of citizens challenged Trump’s eligibility and concluded that he should be disqualified for inciting an insurrection on 6 January 2021.

     Has this happened before?

     The provision has rarely been used, and never in such a high-profile case. In 1919, Congress refused to seat a socialist, contending he gave aid and comfort to the country’s enemies during the first world war.

     Last year, in the clause’s first use since then, a New Mexico judge barred a rural county commissioner who had entered the Capitol on January 6 from office.

    What does this mean for the election?

     The Colorado ruling applies only to the state’s Republican primary, which will take place on 5 March, meaning Trump might not appear on the ballot for that vote. The same is true in Maine – if the decision takes effect, it would only apply to the state’s ballot.

     The Colorado supreme court temporarily stayed its ruling until 4 January, however, which would allow the US supreme court until then to decide whether to take the case. That’s the day before the qualifying deadline for candidates.

     Colorado is no longer a swing state – Biden won it by a double-digit margin in 2020, and the last time a Republican won it was 2004 – but the ruling could influence other cases across the US, where dozens of similar cases are percolating. Other state courts have ruled against the plaintiffs; in Michigan, a judge ruled that Congress, not the courts, should make the call.

     Advocates hoped the case would boost a wider disqualification effort and potentially put the issue before the US supreme court. It’s unclear whether the court might rule on narrow procedural and technical grounds, or answer the underlying constitutional question of whether Trump can be banished from the ballot under the 14th amendment.

     The case could have significant political fallout as well. Trump allies will paint it as an anti-democratic effort to thwart the will of the American people, lumping it in with the numerous legal cases he faces in state and federal court.

     “Democrats are so afraid that President Trump will win on Nov 5th 2024 that they are illegally attempting to take him off the ballot,” the Republican congresswoman Elise Stefanik, a close Trump ally, posted on social media.

     Trump didn’t mention the decision during an evening rally on 19 December in Iowa but his campaign sent out a fundraising email calling it a “tyrannical ruling”, with the statement going on to say:

     “Democrat Party leaders are in a state of paranoia over the growing, dominant lead President Trump has amassed in the polls. They have lost faith in the failed Biden presidency and are now doing everything they can to stop the American voters from throwing them out of office next November.”

     Trump’s attorneys, meanwhile, have argued that the 14th amendment’s language does not apply to the presidency. A lawyer for Trump has also argued that the January 6 riot at the Capitol was not serious enough to qualify for insurrection, and that any remarks that Trump made to his supporters that day in Washington were protected under free speech.”

     How if we fail to consequent treason and insurrection, and thereby make a rule that all things are permitted in service to theocratic patriarchy and white supremacist terror?

     As written in The Guardian editorial, in an article entitled The Guardian view on a second Trump presidency: things could only get worse; Over the holidays, this column will explore next year’s urgent issues. Today we look at the danger posed by the former president’s bid for reelection; “The great spectre haunting 2024 is the threat of Donald Trump triumphing in November’s election. A second stint in the Oval Office would have grim repercussions for the US and the world. He dominates the Republican race for the presidential candidacy, while recent polls showed him beating Joe Biden in five of the six key battleground states, and besting the president on issues including the economy and national security. The Biden administration has overseen a striking economic recovery in tough global conditions, but voters don’t feel the improvement. The president’s handling of the war in Gaza is alienating core supporters. He inspires little enthusiasm.

     Democrats point out that there’s a long way to go and that November’s off-year election results point to a brighter picture. Mr Trump faces a dizzying array of legal cases, though the most significant may not move to a trial before the election. While they boost the belief of diehard admirers that he is being persecuted, some supporters say he should not stand if convicted. It’s not impossible that he might run from a prison cell.

     Mr Trump is already teeing voters up to declare a Biden victory fraudulent again. Election officials have been bombarded with death threats. Convictions for the January 6 storming of the Capitol were welcome and necessary, but his supporters remain armed and dangerous.

     What would Mr Trump’s return to the White House mean for America and the world? Nothing good. For all the volatility of his presidency, he delivered on key pledges for his followers: his supreme court appointments led to the overturning of Roe v Wade. Authoritarians don’t improve with power: quite the opposite. Mr Trump’s first term began with “alternative facts” about his inauguration and ended with the big lie that the 2020 election was stolen from him. His recent statements make 2016’s inflammatory rhetoric look almost mealy-mouthed. He declared that he would be a dictator, though only on “day one”, because “I want a wall and I want to drill, drill, drill”. His language is not merely racist but echoes the invective of Nazi Germany: immigrants are “poisoning the blood of our country”, while “communists, Marxists, fascists and the radical-left thugs” are “vermin”.

       Sycophantic state

     What is truly alarming this time is not merely that he has declared his intentions loud and clear, it is that his backers have drawn up action plans to implement his talking points, and that he faces fewer political, institutional or legal constraints. “You cannot count on those institutions to restrain him,” said former Republican congresswoman Liz Cheney, who fears that her country is “sleepwalking into dictatorship”. Ms Cheney is a rare exception to the rule that Republican politicians have ultimately fallen into line even when they briefly balked at his extremes. A re-elected President Trump would benefit from a more compliant Congress (though there’s speculation that Democrats might win back the House while the GOP takes the Senate). And having set out his stall, he could claim a mandate from the people.

     He would not appoint those who might thwart his will this time. “The lesson he learned was to hire sycophants,” his former chief of staff John Kelly observed. He boasts that he would “dismantle the deep state”, clearing out career employees and replacing them with appointees he could fire at will. Intimidation – siccing his base on those who impede him – would always be an option. He has suggested that Gen Mark Milley, the outgoing chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, deserved to be put to death.

     Legal challenges to his policies would face a harder path – the supreme court now has a conservative supermajority, with three Trump appointees, and he similarly stacked lower levels of the judiciary. He is preparing plans to turn the power of the state against opponents and critics, and boasting of “retribution” for those who hindered his attempt to steal the last election. He has warned that he would urge his attorney general to indict any political rival even without known grounds, saying: “I don’t know. Indict him on income tax evasion.” His associates have reportedly begun drafting plans to deploy the military against civil demonstrations – as he wanted to do against Black Lives Matter protests in 2020. One would hope that military leaders would oppose this. But it would be complacent to assume that.

     Politics of hate

     On the international front, the battle against global heating would be struck a catastrophic blow. A second Trump presidency would clearly be good for Vladimir Putin and bad for Ukraine and Nato, which the US could well leave. Mr Trump’s transactional approach to foreign policy puts himself first, and has only the most narrow and short-term conception of US interests. Allies such as South Korea are already contemplating their own nuclear deterrents. He would seek to hammer China on trade again, and Republicans would encourage him to go further on other fronts, but his admiration for autocrats might allow him to come to terms with Xi Jinping on some issues – notably, Taiwan’s future. Overall, his ignorance, arrogance and erratic nature could be as damaging as his pursuit of specific goals.

     The far right around the world would be emboldened by his victory. Mr Trump is in large part a symptom of our times, but he has encouraged and enabled others in his mould at home and abroad. The social fabric has been damaged by a style of politics in which hatred is the organising principle. Anti-Asian hate crime surged following his racist rhetoric about the “Chinese virus” and “kung flu”. A defeat for Mr Trump would not in itself be sufficient to defeat Trumpism. But it is necessary.

     The Democrats cannot campaign only on the threat that Mr Trump poses. They must speak to broader concerns too. But focusing on the likely consequences of his re-election is critical to ensuring that voters understand the choice they are making – including by not voting, or by backing a candidate other than Mr Biden. Think of the way that the voter backlash against the destruction of abortion rights was essential for Democrats in the 2022 midterms and has been evident in ballot measures more recently, with voters opting to preserve or expand access.

     Of course, Mr Trump might not be able to fully implement his nightmarish boasts in office. But he would do more than enough. Drive off a cliff and you might live to tell the tale. But you can’t count on survival – and you can be certain of damage. The US, and the world, cannot afford a second term for Mr Trump.”

     As written by David Smith in The Guardian, in an article entitled ‘Sitting on a powder keg’: US braces for a year, and an election, like no other; “The 60th US presidential election, which will unfold in 2024, will be quite unlike any that has gone before as the US, and the rest of the world, braces for a contest amid fears of eroding democracy and the looming threat of authoritarianism.

     It will be a fight marked by numerous unwanted firsts as the oldest president in the country’s history is likely to face the first former US president to stand trial on criminal charges. A once aspirational nation will continue its plunge into anxiety and divisions about crime, immigration, race, foreign wars and the cost of living.

     Democrat Joe Biden, 81, is preparing for the kind of gruelling campaign he was able to avoid during coronavirus lockdowns in 2020. Republican Donald Trump will spend some of his campaign in a courtroom and has vowed authoritarian-style retribution if he wins. For voters it is a time of stark choices, unique spectacles and simmering danger.

     “It feels to me as if America is sitting on a powder keg and the fuse has been lit,” said Larry Jacobs, the director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota. “The protective shield that all democracies and social orders rely on – legitimacy of the governing body, some level of elite responsibility, the willingness of citizens to view their neighbors in a civic way – is in an advanced stage of decline or collapse.

     “It’s quite possible that the powder keg that America’s sitting on will explode over the course of 2024.”

     US politics entered a new, turbulent era with Trump’s shocking victory over Hillary Clinton in 2016. The businessman and reality TV star, tapping into populist rage against the establishment, was the first president with no prior political or military experience. His chaotic four-year presidency was scarred by the Covid-19 pandemic and ended with a bitter defeat by Biden in a 2020 election that was itself billed as an unprecedented stress test of democracy.

     Trump never accepted the result and his attempts to overturn it culminated in a deadly riot at the US Capitol on 6 January 2021, and his second impeachment. He has spent three years plotting revenge and describes the 5 November election as “the final battle”. But he is running for president under the shadow of 91 criminal charges in four jurisdictions, knowing that regaining the White House might be his best hope of avoiding prison – a calculus that could make him and his supporters more desperate and volatile than ever.

     Allan Lichtman, a history professor at American University in Washington, said: “This is the most astounding election I have ever seen.

     “We have never had an election where a likely major party nominee is indicted for major felony charges of the most serious nature; this is not shoplifting. He’s being charged with an attempt to destroy our democracy and subverting our national security. Both in terms of Trump’s personal morality and his incredibly serious crimes, we have never seen anything remotely like this.”

     First Trump must win the Republican primary against Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley, putting the electoral and legal calendars on a collision course. On 16 January, a day after the Iowa caucuses kick off the Republican nomination process, Trump faces a defamation trial brought by the writer E Jean Carroll, who has already won a $5m judgment against him after a jury found him liable for sexual abuse and defamation.

     On 4 March, Trump is due in court in Washington in a federal case accusing him of plotting to overturn the 2020 election result. The following day is Super Tuesday, when more than 15 states are scheduled to hold Republican primaries, the biggest delegate haul of the campaign.

     On 25 March, Trump also faces state charges in New York over hush-money payments to an adult film star, although the judge has acknowledged he may postpone that because of the federal trial. On 5 August, prosecutors have asked to start an election fraud trial in Georgia, less than three weeks after Trump is likely to have been nominated by the Republican national convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

     Trump is hard at work to flip his legal troubles to his political advantage, contending that he is a victim of a Democratic deep state conspiracy. He frequently tells his supporters: “In the end, they’re not coming after me. They’re coming after you – and I’m just standing in their way.” His Georgia mugshot has been slapped on T-shirts and other merchandise like a lucrative badge of honor.

     It seems to be working, at least according to a series of opinion polls that show Trump leading Biden in a hypothetical matchup. A survey in early December for the Wall Street Journal newspaper showed Trump ahead by four points, 47% to 43%. When five potential third-party and independent candidates were included, Trump’s lead over Biden expanded to six points, 37% to 31%.

     To Democrats, such figures are bewildering. Biden’s defenders point to his record, including the creation of 14m jobs, strong GDP growth and four major legislative victories on coronavirus relief, infrastructure, domestic production of computer chips and the biggest climate action in history. He has also led the western alliance against Russian aggression in Ukraine.

     Lichtman added: “He gets credit for nothing. It’s just amazing: I’ve never seen a president do so much and get so little mileage on it. He has more domestic accomplishments than any American president since the 1960s. He’s presided over an amazing economic recovery, a far better economy than was under Donald Trump even before the pandemic in terms of jobs, wages, GDP. Inflation has gone down by two-thirds.

     “It was Biden who single-handedly put together the coalition of the west that stopped [Vladimir] Putin from quickly overtaking Ukraine. He seems to get no credit for any of this whatsoever and that’s partly his own fault and the fault of the Democratic party. The Democratic party has been horrible for some time now – at least 15 years. Republicans are so much better at messaging.”

     The president’s approval rating has been stubbornly low since around the time of the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan in the summer of 2021. He is grappling with record numbers of migrants entering the country – an issue that increasingly aggravates states beyond the US-Mexico border. His refusal to call for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza is costing him some support among progressives and young people.

     The latest Democratic messaging salvo – “Bidenomics” – appears to have been a flop at a moment when many voters blame him for rising prices and a cost-of-living crisis. For all the barrage of positive economic data, Americans are lacking the feelgood factor.

     Andra Gillespie, a political scientist at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, said: “People feel that Biden overpromised and underdelivered and ultimately what it came down to was he didn’t make me feel good while he did it and he didn’t make it look easy.”

     Biden still holds a potential ace in the hole. Democrats plan to make abortion central to the 2024 campaign, with opinion polls showing most Americans do not favor strict limits on reproductive rights. The party is hoping threats to those rights will encourage millions of women and independents to vote their way next year. It is also seeking to put measures enshrining access to abortion in state constitutions on as many ballots as possible.

     The issue has flummoxed Republicans, with some concerned the party has gone too far with state-level restrictions since the supreme court overturned the landmark 1973 Roe v Wade ruling last year, ending constitutional protection for abortion. Trump has taken notice and is conspicuously trying to be vague on the issue.

     The Wall Street Journal poll found Biden leading Trump on abortion and democracy by double digits. But it gave Trump a double-digit lead on the economy, inflation, crime, border security, the wars in Ukraine and Gaza and physical and mental fitness for office. Biden still has time to reshape perceptions but even close allies concede that he is not an inspirational speechmaker like Bill Clinton or Barack Obama. How can he turn it around?

     Tara Setmayer, a former Republican communications director on Capitol Hill, said: “My advice would be to be aggressive, go on offence and set the narrative.    They must make the contrast between a Biden America and a Trump America and ask people which America do they want to live in.

     “A year out, most people are not paying attention so the polls are meaningless in that they are not predictive of what will happen in a year. Where they do have value is what the trend line shows, which is that the American people are not getting the messaging clearly enough now, so it’s time to get up off their asses and activate the campaign at level 10 right now.”

     Setmayer, a senior adviser to the anti-Trump group the Lincoln Project, added: “What Donald Trump is telegraphing, what he plans to do to this country, I don’t fully think most Americans understand.

     “Use the power of incumbency, of the bully pulpit, of their record. Biden is surrounded by people who are experienced campaign veterans and so is he. Use it.”

     Should Trump prevail, numerous critics have warned that his return would hollow out American democracy and presage a drift towards Hungarian-style authoritarianism. In a recent interview on Fox News, Trump was asked: “You are promising America tonight, you would never abuse this power as retribution against anybody?” He did not give an outright denial but replied airily: “Except for day one.”

     Should Biden serve a second term, he will be 86 when he leaves office. Dean Phillips, 54, a congressman from Minnesota, mounting a Democratic primary challenge, is calling for a new generation of leadership. Some Democrats privately wish that Biden had declared mission accomplished after the 2022 midterm elections and stepped down to make way for younger contenders such as Pete Buttigieg, Kamala Harris, Gavin Newsom and Gretchen Whitmer. It now appears too late.

     Frank Luntz, a prominent consultant and pollster, said: “Democrats should be apoplectic. Donald Trump has been indicted in felony after felony. The economy is relatively OK and yet Biden is sinking every week and it’s because of something that no soundbite and no messaging can fix: his age. If I were a Democratic strategist, I would have been arrested in front of the White House for begging him to accept four years and move on. You can’t fix age.”

     Biden’s potential for gaffes was limited during the pandemic election; this time he will be expected to travel far and wide, his every misstep amplified by rightwing media. The social media platform X, formerly Twitter, is now owned by Elon Musk and populated by extremists such as Tucker Carlson and Alex Jones. This has also been dubbed the first “AI election”, with deepfakes threatening to accelerate the spread of disinformation – a tempting target for foreign interference.

     It is unfolding in a febrile atmosphere of conspiracy theories, polarisation, gun violence and surging antisemitism and Islamophobia. Political opponents are increasingly framed as mortal enemies. Violence erupted on January 6 and again last year when a man broke into the home of the former House speaker Nancy Pelosi and attacked her husband with a hammer.

     Henry Olsen, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center thinktank in Washington, said: “If you have something like the last couple of elections where it’s razor thin, and people who don’t understand the American electoral process see malfeasance and misfeasance where there is none, we have a very non-trivial chance of violence.

     “I wouldn’t even presume that we wouldn’t have an outbreak of sporadic violence before that. The fact is when people see each other as the enemy, and talk about each other as the enemy, people who are mentally unbalanced and have access to firearms will do mentally unbalanced things.”

     Luntz does not foresee violence.

     But nor is he optimistic about the future of a nation torn between hope and fear. “What I do expect is a fraying no longer at the edges but at the heart of American democracy,” he said. “I’m afraid that we are reaching the point of no return. In my conversations with senators and congressmen every day I’m on the Hill – it doesn’t matter which party – we all agree that it’s not coming, it’s here, and no one knows what to do about it.”

      As written by Rachel Leingang in The Guardian, in an article entitled US supreme court ruling on Trump ballot ban: five key takeaways: Donald Trump can remain on the presidential ballot but the question of whether he was guilty of insurrection unresolved; “The US supreme court ruled on Monday that former president Donald Trump cannot be kept off the ballot in Colorado, foreclosing a series of legal challenges the Republican frontrunner faced in multiple states as he seeks a return to the White House.

     The 14th amendment’s third clause, enacted after the US civil war, seeks to prevent people who were elected officials who engaged in insurrection from then holding office again. It has been rarely used since, but was resurrected by advocacy groups and voters who claim it applies to Trump because of his attempts to overturn the 2020 election results.

     The court’s nine justices agreed that a state can’t remove a federal candidate from its ballot. Though the decision was unanimous, briefs filed separately indicate tension among the justices about how far the majority opinion went.

     Because the case involved an obscure part of the constitution, the court had to parse questions of how the clause works and to whom it applies. And, perhaps most critically, the court’s decision held tremendous capacity for disruption during an election year with a leading candidate known to rile up his followers.

     Here are some key takeaways from the decision and the broader context at play.

    State v federal rights at heart of issue

     The core of the decision rests simply on the interplay between state and federal rights.

     Though states administer federal elections, the court decided states have no authority to remove a candidate from the running under Section 3. Instead, the majority opinion noted, the 14th amendment “expanded federal power at the expense of state autonomy”. Allowing states to do as Colorado did would “invert the Fourteenth Amendment’s rebalancing of federal and state power”.

     The language of the clause doesn’t include any direction on how a state could enforce it, the majority said. Only Congress is mentioned as an enforcer, they argue.

     States could, and did, use the section to disqualify state candidates from holding office if they violate the insurrectionist clause, the majority wrote.

     This federalism argument was clearly agreed to by all nine justices – though the majority opinion goes on further to suggest how Congress might act to enforce the clause in the future.

     Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson all wrote, in two separate opinions, that the majority opinion went too far.

     The decision that states lack the authority here “provides a secure and sufficient basis to resolve this case”, the liberal justices (Sotomayor, Kagan and Jackson) wrote. “The Court should have started and ended its opinion with this conclusion.”

     Tension among the justices on how far the ruling goes

     The justices’ unanimity in the belief that the Colorado court couldn’t remove Trump was fractured by two addendums that strike at the extension of the case beyond its scope.

     The court’s majority – conservative justices John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh, Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch – specified how the insurrectionist clause would need to be enforced. It would require an act of Congress to determine who would be ineligible to hold office because of insurrection, they wrote, relying on another section of the 14th amendment to make the case.

    The liberal justices, in one separate opinion, and the conservative Barrett, in her own, said the majority went too far by prescribing what kind of process would be needed.

     The case did not require the justices to “address the complicated question whether federal legislation is the exclusive vehicle through which Section 3 can be enforced”, Barrett wrote. Because of the sensitivity of the issue and its context, the justices should have left it with the federalism justification alone. “In my judgment, this is not the time to amplify disagreement with stridency,” she wrote.

     The liberal justices took this disagreement further, saying the majority opinion moved into constitutional questions it didn’t need to as a way to “insulate this court and petitioner from future controversy”.

     The case did not involve federal action; it was a state court in Colorado that decided Trump could not be on the ballot there. The majority did not need to move into contested federal issues, the liberals said. “These musings are as inadequately supported as they are gratuitous.”

     No decision on whether Trump engaged in insurrection

     What’s left entirely unsaid in the court’s opinions issued on Monday: whether Trump engaged in insurrection.

     A finding that Trump had himself engaged in insurrection would have been required for keeping the former president off the ballot. The clause says that a person could be disqualified from holding office again if they had “engaged in insurrection or rebellion”.

     Trump and his team fought against this claim, saying his actions after the 2020 election did not constitute an insurrection. Instead, he argued, 6 January was more akin to a “riot” and his comments to his followers, which some have contended amounted to incitement, were protected by the first amendment. In Colorado, the state supreme court had concluded that he incited his followers to engage in insurrection, which met the definition for engaging in insurrection.

     The legal cases against Trump over his election subversion will continue unabated by any opining by the high court about whether he is an insurrectionist.

    The potential for mayhem/violence was high because of this case

     The 2024 election was already marked by tension because of the presence of Trump; his ability to direct his followers is unparalleled in American politics.

     The cases against Trump in several states – for election subversion, hush-money claims, keeping classified documents and business fraud – have not injured his standing with his followers, but instead seemingly solidified or even amplified their support.

     The 14th amendment cases entered into this fraught dynamic, throwing yet another legal bomb, albeit an obscure one, that gave Trump’s followers further belief that there is a conspiracy against Trump’s ability to run for re-election.

     On the campaign trail, Trump has used these legal liabilities to his benefit, claiming they are evidence of election interference and a sign that President Joe Biden, not he, is a threat to democracy.

     A survey focused on political violence conducted by the University of Chicago’s Chicago Project on Security & Threats in January showed that the court’s decision on the 14th amendment held the potential for further support of political violence, regardless of how the court decided, because of the extreme partisan divide on the issue.

     Trump called the decision “very well-crafted” and said he thought it would bring the country together. Most states were “thrilled” to have Trump on the ballot, he said, but others didn’t want him on there for “political reasons” and because of “poll numbers”.

     The court clearly considered the political implications

     While courts often claim to avoid wading in on political questions, politics clearly played into how the court decided on this case. The implications of how removing Trump could play out electorally are contemplated throughout the opinions.

     The potential that a candidate could be ineligible in some states, leading to a “patchwork” effect, would disrupt voters, the majority wrote in their opinion.

     “An evolving electoral map could dramatically change the behavior of voters, parties, and States across the country, in different ways and at different times,” the majority wrote. “The disruption would be all the more acute – and could nullify the votes of millions and change the election result – if Section 3 enforcement were attempted after the Nation has voted. Nothing in the Constitution requires that we endure such chaos – arriving at any time or different times, up to and perhaps beyond the Inauguration.”

     It wasn’t just politics with the election itself or the public at large that came into view; the political dynamics between the justices showed through as well.

     The liberal justices jabbed at the majority opinion for its extension of the case into how Congress would need to act, claiming that was an attempt to “insulate all alleged insurrectionists from future challenges to their holding federal office”.

     Barrett, in her separate opinion, tried to strike a conciliatory note. She called attention to the fact that the court unanimously decided on a “politically charged issue in the volatile season of a Presidential election”. The court’s goal, she said, should be to turn down the national temperature instead of inflame it.

     “For present purposes, our differences are far less important than our unanimity: All nine Justices agree on the outcome of this case,” she wrote. “That is the message Americans should take home.”

     As written by Rachel Leingang in The Guardian, in an article entitled Trump’s supreme court case hinged on the 14th amendment – what it actually means: The supreme court determined if section 3 of the 14th amendment – which bars insurrectionists from holding office – applied to Trump; “ A former US president could have been kicked off the ballot in his quest to return to the White House because of a rarely used provision in an amendment created in the aftermath of the civil war.

     A lawsuit out of Colorado that sought to oust Donald Trump in his re-election bid went before the US supreme court, which decided Trump could not be removed from seeking office there over the 14th amendment’s third clause.

      The clause was intended to ensure that people who participated in the civil war and other acts against the US weren’t allowed to keep or resume holding positions of power in government. In essence, it says that people could not again hold office if they had participated in insurrection or rebellion against the country while they were in office.

     Trump’s team argued the clause doesn’t apply to him for a handful of reasons, based on both esoteric readings of the clause itself and on larger questions like what constitutes an insurrection.

     The justices sided with Trump, saying states could not try to keep a federal candidate off the ballot because it was beyond their power. The case involved several issues of legal reasoning the justices had to weigh.

     Here are the clause’s big questions.

     “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State …”

     The first part of the clause essentially says that a person can’t hold office again if they were an officer of the US when they participated in an insurrection. It specifies that it applies broadly – to the presidency, Congress and “any office … under the United States”.

     Trump’s team argued, though, that this means he couldn’t hold office again, not that he can’t run for office again, so he can’t be disqualified from appearing on the ballot. The legal question would then be raised anew if he won and therefore “held office” again. The case is therefore premature, they said.

     In Colorado, the court concluded that because Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president, it would be a “wrongful act” for the secretary of state there to list him as a candidate in the presidential primary.

     “… who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States …”

     Trump’s arguments related to this part of the clause involve twists of plain language to conclude the president is not an “officer of the United States” and therefore the clause doesn’t apply because anything Trump did happened when he was president.

     His attorneys argued that because the presidency isn’t explicitly listed in the clause, it wasn’t intended to include the presidency. They’ve also said that the presidency is not “under” the United States because it is the government, and because the president is an officer of the constitution, not of the United States.

     These arguments go hand in hand with the earlier provision in the clause, about whether someone could hold office. Trump’s team argued that because the presidency isn’t specifically mentioned, like “member of Congress” is, it doesn’t apply to him.

     The Colorado supreme court essentially said the plain language of the amendment and how the presidency is viewed overall show that the presidency is an office of the US, and the president would be considered an “officer” of the US.

     “President Trump asks us to hold that Section Three disqualifies every oath-breaking insurrectionist except the most powerful one and that it bars oath-breakers from virtually every office, both state and federal, except the highest one in the land,” Colorado’s ruling says.

     “… shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”

     The insurrection part of the clause involves perhaps the more political questions of the case: whether the associated events of 6 January 2021 to overturn Trump’s loss would constitute an “insurrection” and, if so, if Trump himself “engaged” in it.

     In Colorado, the case went before a jury for a trial, with evidence submitted that backed up the claims both that the events of 6 January 2021 were an insurrection and that Trump engaged in it. Among the evidence were many months of claims made by Trump that the election was stolen and specific callouts to his supporters to protest the results.

     Using definitions of what was considered an insurrection when the clause was written, the Colorado court said basically that it would entail a public use or threat of force by a group of people to hinder some execution of the constitution – in this case, the awarding of electors and the peaceful transfer of power. By that definition, the events of 6 January constituted an insurrection.

     Trump’s team argued both that the events of 6 January were not an insurrection and that the former president didn’t engage in it anyway. His attorneys instead described the events as a “riot” and said the president’s speech was protected by the first amendment. They also pointed to comments he made telling the mob to go home eventually on 6 January, in which he said they should “go peacefully and patriotically”.

     Colorado’s justices concluded that free speech rights don’t allow for incitement and that his intent was to call for his supporters to fight his loss, which they responded to.

    “President Trump’s direct and express efforts, over several months, exhorting his supporters to march to the Capitol to prevent what he falsely characterized as an alleged fraud on the people of this country were indisputably overt and voluntary,” the ruling said. “Moreover, the evidence amply showed that President Trump undertook all these actions to aid and further a common unlawful purpose that he himself conceived and set in motion: prevent Congress from certifying the 2020 presidential election and stop the peaceful transfer of power.”

     But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

    Finally, there’s the matter of what role states play in assessing eligibility for federal offices and whether a state can decide not to put a candidate on the ballot because they haven’t met federal constitutional requirements for running, which include factors like age and citizenship as well as the broader insurrection question.

     Even for federal elections, states manage the electoral process of who can vote, how they vote and how results are counted.

     Trump argued that eligibility in this case is a political question that Congress should decide, not one for state courts – and not one for courts in general, which tend to stay away from purely political questions.

     His team tried to make the case that Congress would need to put the process in motion to keep him off the ballot, saying that the clause is not “self-executing”, or something that goes into effect upon its creation.

     The clause itself doesn’t say anything about whether Congress would initiate such a proceeding. Instead, it says Congress could remove a finding that kept an insurrectionist off the ballot with a two-thirds vote, thus allowing that person to hold office again.

     The Colorado court rejected the idea that the clause needs congressional action to be implemented, relying on other Reconstruction-era amendments that went into effect without congressional action. If those other amendments needed Congress to go into effect, it “would lead to absurd results”.

     “The result of such inaction would mean that slavery remains legal; Black citizens would be counted as less than full citizens for reapportionment; nonwhite male voters could be disenfranchised; and any individual who engaged in insurrection against the government would nonetheless be able to serve in the government, regardless of whether two-thirds of Congress had lifted the disqualification,” the court wrote. “Surely that was not the drafters’ intent.”

     As written by Robert Reich in his newsletter, entitled The most troubling aspect of today’s Supreme Court decision: It doesn’t just allow Trump back on the ballot, but potentially disables enforcement of other provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment; “Friends, Even though Trump clearly engaged in an insurrection and even though the Constitution clearly bars insurrections from holding elected office, the Supreme Court today ruled that Trump will remain on the ballot anyway.

     With the Super Tuesday primaries looming tomorrow, all nine justices agreed that states (in this case, Colorado) cannot decide to keep Trump off the ballot under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment – which bars anyone who has sworn an oath to the Constitution and yet participated in an insurrection against the United States from holding office. They agreed that allowing states to make such decisions would lead to a patchwork of ballots, undercutting federal authority.

     But this may not be the most troubling aspect of their decision over the long term. The five justices in the majority went further, ruling that Section 3 could only be enforced by Congress. They rested their argument on Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, which provides that Congress shall pass “appropriate legislation” to enforce the Amendment — such as, for example, procedures to identify which individuals should be disqualified under Section 3. And Congress has not done so.

    But requiring that Congress first pass such legislation would prevent the Justice Department from bringing a suit alleging that someone should not be allowed on a ballot because they participated in an insurrection.

    It would in effect shield any future insurrectionist candidate, whose party controls at least one chamber of commerce and therefore would not enact such legislation.

     Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson were also rightfully concerned that the majority’s decision could be used to prevent the Justice Department from enforcing other provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment – such as Section 1, which prohibits states from making or enforcing laws that “abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States” or deprive “any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” or deny them “equal protection of the laws.”

     Under the majority’s view of how the Fourteenth Amendment should be enforced, Section 5 might first require Congress to pass “appropriate legislation” to identify which defendants should be prosecuted under Section 1, before the Justice Department could act.

     States charged with violating the privileges and immunities clause, or denying people due process of law, or denying their citizens the equal protection of the law will almost certainly use today’s ruling in attempts to shield themselves from federal prosecution.

     By the way, Clarence Thomas should never have participated in this case, given his obvious conflicts of interest. His participation makes the Supreme Court’s recently adopted “ethics” guidelines look like the sham they are.”

Arrest Trump Now/ MeidasTouch

US supreme court ruling on Trump ballot ban: five key takeaways

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2024/mar/04/us-supreme-court-14th-amendment-key-takeaways

Trump’s supreme court case hinged on the 14th amendment – what it actually means

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2024/feb/08/14th-amendment-insurrection-disqualify-trump

Unanimity over 14th amendment masks supreme court schism on accountability

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2024/mar/04/supreme-court-trump-14th-amendment

Read the supreme court ruling on Trump’s removal from Colorado ballot – in full

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/mar/04/supreme-court-trump-ruling-document

The most troubling aspect of today’s Supreme Court decision

It doesn’t just allow Trump back on the ballot, but potentially disables enforcement of other provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment/ Robert Reich

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/WhctKKZWgfTVPPzCSpxwfwDJnvsfvlNHvKpcwTLlLFsJGxQKbkVRVjwKCHlXmVbjlzFxzqG

Why did Maine and Colorado disqualify Trump from their ballots?

Maine disqualifies Trump from presidential primary ballot, citing insurrection clause

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/dec/28/maine-disqualifies-trump-presidential-primary-ballot-insurrection

The Guardian view on a second Trump presidency: things could only get worse

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/dec/28/the-guardian-view-on-a-second-trump-presidency-things-could-only-get-worse

‘Sitting on a powder keg’: US braces for a year, and an election, like no other

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/dec/27/politics-2024-trump-biden-election-democracy-authoritarian?CMP=share_btn_link

On Damnatio Memoriae

https://alexandermeddings.com/history/ancient-history/damnatio-memoriae-people-the-romans-tried-to-erase-from-history

The Man Without a Country, by Edward Everett Hale

February 19 2024 Among the Best and the Worst of Us: Our Presidents as Symbols and Figures of the American Soul

     Among the best and the worst of us, our Presidents function as authorized national identities and as symbols and figures of the American soul. Beyond the power to reshape us and our future through electoral politics and legislative action, those we choose as our leaders always have this more primary role in our society, and we may study their biographies as maps of our interior histories and the dynamics of our public and private selves.

    Elected leaders in a democracy are unique in that the people have chosen them as representatives of themselves, and have entrusted them with the power of executive decision as the moral compass of a nation. Our representatives are also signs and representations of ourselves as individuals personally, and like our friends have been chosen to help us become who we want to be. As with the Hobgoblin’s broken mirror, we may read both our past and our future in their myriad images, and as role models and figures of historical forces they bear transformative power.

     Like the gods of our dreams and the demons of our nightmares, one conjures and invokes a President with fascination and with terror.

    To paraphrase the lines spoken by the incomparable Peter O’Toole in King Ralph, “To be the President of the United States is a responsibility like no other on Earth. You must become a symbol of all that is best about America. An embodiment of our history, our culture, our morality, our pride of achievement. In short, our ideal of civilization.”

     “I’m afraid it’s a god’s burden to bear. Unfortunately, it must be borne by a human being.”

     As we move forward with the Restoration of America in the Biden Presidency and the triumph of love over hate, let us remember the lessons of our past lest we be doomed to endless repetitions of our mistakes, but also to celebrate and treasure our successes and victories as maps of our future possibilities.

    In this context I think of America as represented in Edward Albee’s iconic play, Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf. My father directed some of his plays, and from the age of four I listened intently to their conversations during rehearsals beside them from a center front seat in the theatre, which interrogated Albee’s direct influences and references among his fellow Absurdists Samuel Beckett, Eugene Ionesco, Jean Genet, and Harold Pinter.

      The line of transmission of Absurdist elements in literature originates with Fyodor Dostoevsky, Lewis Carroll, Nikolai Gogol, and Franz Kafka, diverges from the limits of Humanism with Antonin Artaud, Eugene Ionesco, Witold Gombrowicz, Albert Camus, Albee and his ilk as previously cited, diverged from the main tradition as Nihilism in Samuel Beckett, Thomas Ligotti, and Kobo Abe, and continues today in the works of Haruki Murakami, Kurt Vonnegut, and Elif Shafak.

     With a title taken from the song Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Wolf? in the 1933 Disney short film Three Little Pigs, where two of the pigs are convinced they’re safe from the wolf in their straw and twig houses, you know that threatening truths will undo the house of illusions George and Martha, emblematic founders of America, have built around themselves.

      In Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf, Edward Albee has given us the Great American Play, a mirror in which we see ourselves as we are rather than the illusions we have spun around and through ourselves as a defensive mask. It is about the historical and political consequences of a lie we told at our founding   about freedom and equality in a government designed to leave systemic power asymmetries of wealth, race, and gender untouched and possibly to enforce them; about the human cost of unequal power and falsification as dysfunctional relationships, and about the implications for meaning and being when the personal and political realms of action collide and change each other.

     Here also Albee leads us through a labyrinth of mirrors, a funhouse of distorted images, both comical and grotesque, images which capture and reflect, assimilating or robbing us of our uniqueness in infinite regress to steal our souls, which through his magic of seeing our true selves becomes a Hobgoblin’s Broken Mirror as in in Anderson’s The Snow Queen, fragmented images which multiply our possibilities of becoming human.

     I particularly like the following lines, laden with satire of our falsification through invented histories and authorized identities, and influential to Jean Baudrillard’s theory of simulacra;

       “Martha: Truth or illusion, George; you don’t know the difference.

    George: No, but we must carry on as though we did.

    Martha: Amen.”

    Do see the iconic 1966 film adaptation starring Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor; I used to show it to high school students on day one of American History.

      And I would say in preface to the class; Here we see images of the history from which must emerge to become human as self-created and self-owned beings; histories which we drag behind us like invisible reptilian tails, with legacies of unequal power and multigenerational epigenetic trauma.

     I want you to seize these images and reclaim them for your own. Always there remains the struggle between the masks we make for ourselves and those made for us by others. This is the first revolution in which we all must fight; the struggle for ownership of ourselves.

     We are gathered here to study history and our place in it, and to interrogate our informing, motivating, and shaping sources as stories, to perform the four primary duties of a citizen; Question Authority, Expose Authority, Mock Authority, and Challenge Authority, and to be what Foucault called truth tellers.

     So, I have a film for you which models how to perform these roles, and this is where we will begin our study of American History, with the Original Lie which founded our nation. This is who we are, and it falls to each of us to make a better future than we have the past; to become a fulcrum, and change the balance of power in the world.

    Here is a reading list of some of our President’s biographies as exemplars of our national identity and character as it unfolds over time, bearing in mind the relationship between memory, history, and identity as narratives:

Revolutionary Characters: What Made the Founders Different, The Idea of America: Reflections on the Birth of the United States, The Radicalism of the American Revolution, The American Revolution: A History, The Creation of the American Republic, 1776-1787, Empire of Liberty: A History of the Early Republic, 1789-1815, by Gordon S. Wood

His Excellency: George Washington, American Sphinx: The Character of Thomas Jefferson, First Family: Abigail and John Adams, Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation, Revolutionary Summer: The Birth of American Independence, The Quartet: Orchestrating the Second American Revolution, 1783-1789, American Dialogue: The Founders and Us, by Joseph J. Ellis

Setting the World Ablaze: Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and the American Revolution, Apostles of Revolution: Jefferson, Paine, Monroe and the Struggle Against the Old Order in America and Europe, A Leap in the Dark: The Struggle to Create the American Republic, Independence: The Struggle to Set America Free, Almost a Miracle: The American Victory in the War of Independence, Adams vs. Jefferson: The Tumultuous Election of 1800, by John Ferling

Washington: A Life, Alexander Hamilton, Grant, by Ron Chernow

Valley Forge, by Bob Drury, Tom Clavin

Washington’s Crossing, by David Hackett Fischer

Valiant Ambition: George Washington, Benedict Arnold, and the Fate of the American Revolution, In the Hurricane’s Eye: The Genius of George Washington and the Victory at Yorktown, Bunker Hill, by Nathaniel Philbrick

1776, John Adams, Truman, David McCullough

The Lost World of Thomas Jefferson, Daniel J. Boorstin

Jefferson: Architect of American Liberty, by John B. Boles

The Road to Monticello: The Life and Mind of Thomas Jefferson, George Washington: A Life in Books, by Kevin J. Hayes

Thomas Jefferson: The Art of Power, American Lion: Andrew Jackson in the White House, Destiny and Power: The American Odyssey of George Herbert Walker Bush, The Soul of America: The Battle for Our Better Angels, by Jon Meacham

The Virginia Dynasty: Four Presidents and the Creation of the American Nation,

The Three Lives of James Madison: Genius, Partisan, President, by Noah Feldman

The Summer of 1787: The Men Who Invented the Constitution, Madison’s Gift: Five Partnerships That Built America, Impeached: The Trial of President Andrew Johnson and the Fight for Lincoln’s Legacy, by David O. Stewart

The Last Founding Father: James Monroe and a Nation’s Call to Greatness, John Quincy Adams, by Harlow Giles Unger

Andrew Jackson: His Life and Times, Traitor to His Class: The Privileged Life and Radical Presidency of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Reagan: The Life, by H.W. Brands

A Country of Vast Designs: James K. Polk, the Mexican War and the Conquest of the American Continent, by Robert W. Merry

Lincoln, by David Herbert Donald

Crisis of the House Divided: An Interpretation of the Issues in the Lincoln-Douglas Debates, A New Birth of Freedom: Abraham Lincoln and the Coming of the Civil War, Harry V. Jaffa

Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln, Leadership: In Turbulent Times, No Ordinary Time: Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt: The Home Front in World War II, by Doris Kearns Goodwin

Lincoln Lessons: Reflections on America’s Greatest Leader, by Frank J. Williams (Editor)

A, Lincoln, The Eloquent President: A Portrait of Lincoln Through His Words, American Ulysses: A Life of Ulysses S. Grant, by Ronald C. White Jr.

Personal Memoirs, by Ulysses S. Grant, Geoffrey Perrett (Introduction)

The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt, Theodore Rex, Colonel Roosevelt, Dutch: A Memoir of Ronald Reagan, by Edmund Morris

1920: The Year of the Six Presidents, 1932: The Rise of Hitler and FDR–Two Tales of Politics, Betrayal, and Unlikely Destiny, 1948: Harry Truman’s Improbable Victory and the Year that Transformed America, 1960–LBJ vs. JFK vs. Nixon: The Epic Campaign That Forged Three Presidencies, by David Pietrusza

FDR, Eisenhower in War and Peace, Grant, Bush, by Jean Edward Smith

Eleanor and Franklin, by Joseph P. Lash, Eleanor Roosevelt

Eisenhower: The White House Years, by Jim Newton

A Thousand Days: John F. Kennedy in the White House, Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr.

An Unfinished Life: John F. Kennedy, 1917-1963, Camelot’s Court: Inside the Kennedy White House, The Lost Peace: Leadership in a Time of Horror and Hope, 1945-1953, Lyndon B. Johnson: Portrait of a President, by Robert Dallek

Jacqueline Kennedy: Historic Conversations on Life with John F. Kennedy,

by Jacqueline Kennedy

America’s Queen: The Life of Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, by Sarah Bradford

All the President’s Men, The Final Days, Bob Woodward, Carl Bernstein

Richard Nixon: The Life, by John A. Farrel

A Full Life: Reflections at Ninety, Our Endangered Values: America’s Moral Crisis, by Jimmy Carter

President Carter: The White House Years, by Stuart E. Eizenstat

The Unfinished Presidency: Jimmy Carter’s Journey to the Nobel Peace Prize,

by Douglas Brinkley

Reagan: An American Journey, by Bob Spitz

41: Inside the Presidency of George H.W. Bush, 42: Inside the Presidency of Bill Clinton, by Michael Nelson (Editor), Barbara A. Perry (Editor)

First in His Class: A Biography of Bill Clinton, Barack Obama: The Story, by David Maraniss

The Survivor: Bill Clinton in the White House, by John F. Harris

Living History, Hard Choices, by Hillary Rodham Clinton

A Woman in Charge: The Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton, by Carl Bernstein

Days of Fire: Bush and Cheney in the White House, by Peter Baker

Words That Changed A Nation: The Most Celebrated and Influential Speeches of Barack Obama, A Promised Land, The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream, by Barack Obama

The Bridge: The Life and Rise of Barack Obama, by David Remnick

The Promise: President Obama, Year One, by Jonathan Alter

Promises to Keep: On Life and Politics, by Joe Biden

Joe Biden: A Life of Trial and Redemption, by Jules Witcover

Joe Biden: The Life, the Run, and What Matters Now, by Evan Osnos

The Truths We Hold: An American Journey, by Kamala Harris

    So, lots of honor, courage, brilliance; even if I don’t agree with all of their ideologies, policies, values, goals and objectives. And, far more important than any relative alignment with conservative or revolutionary forces, unquestionably loyal.

     In my world, you stand with those who stand with you; loyalty and the truth and bond of one’s word are the only inviolable principles and laws I honor, and no authentic social relationships or just societies are possible without them.

      Glorious, our Presidents as figures of the selves we wish to become, both as ancestors to cherish and as opponents to match ourselves against in defining America and the future possibilities of becoming human.

     And now for something completely different.

Peril, Fear: Trump in the White House, Rage, by Bob Woodward

Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House, Siege: Trump Under Fire,

by Michael Wolff

Surviving Autocracy, by Masha Gessen

Fascism: A Warning, by Madeleine K. Albright

How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them, How Propaganda Works, by Jason Stanley

Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present, by Ruth Ben-Ghiat

On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century, The Road to Unfreedom: Russia, Europe, America, by Timothy Snyder

Authoritarian Nightmare: Trump and His Followers, by John W. Dean, Bob Altemeyer

How Democracies Die: What History Reveals About Our Future, by Steven Levitsky, Daniel Ziblatt

What Were We Thinking: A Brief Intellectual History of the Trump Era,

by Carlos Lozada

Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World’s Most Dangerous Man, by Mary L. Trump

Trump on the Couch, Dr Justin Frank

The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 27 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President, by Bandy X. Lee

Dangerous Charisma: The Political Psychology of Donald Trump and His Followers, Leaders and Their Followers in a Dangerous World: The Psychology of Political Behavior, by Jerrold M. Post

The Cult of Trump: A Leading Cult Expert Explains How the President Uses Mind Control, by Steven Hassan

Commander in Cheat: How Golf Explains Trump, by Rick Reilly

A Very Stable Genius: Donald J. Trump’s Testing of America, by Philip Rucker

All the President’s Women: Donald Trump and the Making of a Predator, by Barry Levine

Insane Clown President: Dispatches from the 2016 Circus, by Matt Taibbi

The Mueller Report, by The Washington Post

Where Law Ends: Inside the Mueller Investigation, by Andrew Weissmann

True Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Investigation of Donald Trump, by Jeffrey Toobin

A Case for the American People: The United States v. Donald J. Trump, by Norman Eisen

Proof of Collusion: How Trump Betrayed America, Proof of Conspiracy: How Trump’s International Collusion Is Threatening American Democracy, Proof of Corruption: Bribery, Impeachment, and Pandemic in the Age of Trump, by Seth Abramson

The Enemy of the People: A Dangerous Time to Tell the Truth in America,

by Jim Acosta

American Carnage: On the Front Lines of the Republican Civil War and the Rise of President Trump, by Tim Alberta

Donald Trump v. The United States: Inside the Struggle to Stop a President,

by Michael S. Schmidt

Trump and His Generals: The Cost of Chaos, by Peter Bergen

The Best People: Trump’s Cabinet and the Siege on Washington, by Alexander Nazaryan

American Nero: The History of the Destruction of the Rule of Law, and Why Trump Is the Worst Offender, by Richard Painter

Everything Trump Touches Dies: A Republican Strategist Gets Real About the Worst President Ever, by Rick Wilson

Disloyal: The True Story of the Former Personal Attorney to President Donald J. Trump, by Michael Cohen

The Room Where It Happened: A White House Memoir, by John R. Bolton

Unhinged: An Insider’s Account of the Trump White House, by Omarosa Manigault Newman

It Was All a Lie: How the Republican Party Became Donald Trump, by Stuart Stevens

The Man Who Sold America: Trump and the Unraveling of the American Story,

by Joy-Ann Reid

Devil’s Bargain: Steve Bannon, Donald Trump, and the Storming of the Presidency, by Joshua Green

The Plot to Commit Treason: How Donald Trump Pulled Off the Greatest Act of Treachery in US History, by Malcolm Nance

Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin’s War on America and the Election of Donald Trump, by Michael Isikoff, David Corn

House of Trump, House of Putin: The Untold Story of Donald Trump and the Russian Mafia, by Craig Unger

The Apprentice, by Greg Miller

Shadow State: Murder, Mayhem, and Russia’s Attack on the West, by Luke Harding

The Plot to Destroy Democracy: How Putin and His Spies Are Undermining America and Dismantling the West, by Malcolm W. Nance

The Grifter’s Club: Trump, Mar-a-Lago, and the Selling of the Presidency, by Sarah Blaskey

Dark Towers: Deutsche Bank, Donald Trump, and an Epic Trail of Destruction, by David Enrich

The Death of Truth: Notes on Falsehood in the Age of Trump, by Michiko Kakutani

Hoax: Donald Trump, Fox News, and the Dangerous Distortion of Truth,

by Brian Stelter

Audience of One: Television, Donald Trump, and the Fracturing of America, by James Poniewozik

Edward Albee’s Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? With Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton

https://vimeo.com/499019198

Being There film Anniversary Trailer – the ideal American President, a tabula rasa upon which anyone can inscribe anything as a mirror of themselves

King Ralph film, Good Golly Miss Molly scene

(Just because it’s the most purely fun thing ever filmed. One day I will write a comparison of this and the film Being There as ideals of Plato’s Philosopher-King and the divergent forms of leadership in a monarchy and a democracy)

Simulacra and Simulation, Jean Baudrillard

How to be an American President, or a man of honor and valor of any kind; go and walk with those who defy tyranny and terror and place your life in the balance with theirs. This is who we must be, regardless of the cost, for only this will reclaim our humanity.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/20/this-is-a-part-of-history-kyiv-citizens-delighted-by-joe-biden-surprise-visit?CMP=share_btn_link

February 18 2024 New York Casts Out the Trump Crime Family

The people of New York have cast out the Trump crime family; beyond the forfeit of his wealth, it is the loss of power which hurts Trump most, and for all of us it is the exposure of his empire of lies and illusions which most benefits the public good as a consequence of this historic trial.

    Here also is an element of liberation struggle against the Patriarchy and seizures of power by women over systems of unequal power and sexual terror, specifically by Black women who are facing the intersectional and compounded asymmetries of white supremacist terror at the same time, both horrors of which Trump is an apex predator of elite hierarchies of wealth, power, and privilege and a figurehead of reactionary political and social forces which seek the subversion of our democracy and the dehumanization and enslavement of both women and nonwhite peoples.

     So it is with special joy we celebrate the victorious figures of liberation struggle and champions of the people such as Letitia James and Fani Willis.

     As written by Lauren Aratani in The Guardian, in an article entitled Letitia James: the New York state attorney general who brought down the Trump Organization; “On the morning closing arguments were to begin at Donald Trump’s drama-filled New York fraud trial, a small crowd of protesters briefly blocked traffic to denounce the former president. “No dictators in the USA,” the group chanted.

     When a black SUV rolled up to the courthouse, the protestors changed course. “Thank you, Tish! Thank you, Tish!” they cheered as Letitia James ascended the courthouse steps.

     The end of Trump’s fraud trial marked the closing of the New York attorney general’s highest-profile case to date. Though a team of lawyers from her office led the case, James has been the public face of the trial since its start. Sitting behind Trump in court and sometimes casting meme-worthy, incredulous looks at Trump and his team, she has inevitably become a target of his vitriol inside and outside the courtroom.

     James kept her comments on the trial brief, posting summaries of the trial’s happenings each week on social media and sometimes offering comments outside the courthouse. On the last day of the trial, long after Trump had left the courthouse after delivering a bizarre closing statement, James told reporters: “The personal attacks don’t really bother me.”

     On Friday, James was given a stunning victory. The judge overseeing the case, Arthur Engoron, handed her almost everything she had asked for. Trump was fined more than $350m plus pre-judgment interest and he and his eldest sons were banned from doing business in New York for years.

     “Today, justice has been served. This is a tremendous victory for this state, this nation and for everyone who believes that we all must play by the same rules – even former presidents,” James said in a statement. “For years, Donald Trump engaged in massive fraud to falsely inflate his net worth and unjustly enrich himself, his family and his organization.

     “Now, Donald Trump is finally facing accountability for his lying, cheating and staggering fraud. Because no matter how big, rich or powerful you think you are, no one is above the law.”

     It is an argument that James campaigned on when she ran for the attorney general seat in 2018. At the time, the position was embroiled in scandal following abuse accusations against the former attorney general, Eric Schneiderman.

     Raised in Brooklyn with her seven siblings, James attended public schools before getting her law degree at Howard University in Washington DC. She rose through the ranks as a public defender before entering New York politics as a councilmember and then as public advocate, the first Black woman to hold the watchdog role and one where she filed a record number of suits on behalf of people with disabilities, seniors and tenants.

     When she won the attorney general’s office, another first for a Black woman, James vowed to “take that power back” from corporations and corrupt politicians.

     “The law is the great equalizer and the biggest pillar of our democracy,” she said in her inaugural speech in 2019. “I will shine a light into the murkiest of swamps and act as a steward of justice.”

     Even as Trump’s fraud trial comes to an end, James is pursuing other high-profile cases, including a civil case against top officials of the National Rifle Association (NRA). James has accused them of violating non-profit law by using NRA funds for their personal benefit.

     The case could ultimately see the dissolution of the once-powerful gun lobbying group. Wayne LaPierre, the longtime NRA president at the center of the case, resigned in early January before the trial began, in what James said in a statement was an “important victory” for the case.

     James has also found rivals in the Catholic church, which she has sued for mishandling child sexual abuse, and the NYPD over its treatment of Black Lives Matter protesters in 2020. James also filed a lawsuit against Pepsi in November over its single-use plastic polluting the Buffalo River in New York, teeing up a major environmental lawsuit against the beverage company, which is based in New York.

     Critics of James – a longtime New York City councilwoman before she became the state’s attorney general – are usually political or legal opponents like Trump, and have tried to paint her as an opportunist who uses her office to grab national attention.

         When James investigated former New York governor Andrew Cuomo, once an ally, for sexual assault, Cuomo accused her of using the investigation for political motives.

     “There are many agendas and there are many motivations at play,” Cuomo said during his farewell address in August 2021, after James’ investigation found that he had sexually assaulted 11 women.

     When it came to Trump’s trial, he lobbed similar accusations against James, saying inside and outside the courtroom that she was conducting a “witch-hunt” in pursuing her own political agenda.

     “She’s a political hack, and this is a disgrace that a case like this is going on,” Trump said during one of the untethered rants he made on the witness stand in November. “This is a political witch-hunt, and I think she should be ashamed of herself.”

     Serving as a state attorney general is seen as a good launching point for a shot into a state’s governor’s mansion. James briefly ran for governor in 2021, a campaign that lasted only six weeks. She dropped out of the race when it became clear that much of the state’s Democratic party stood behind Kathy Hochul, the lieutenant governor who replaced Cuomo after he resigned.

     When James dropped out of the race, she said she had to “continue my work as attorney general”. At the time, her office was well underway in its investigation into the Trump Organization’s finances.

     “There are a number of important investigations and cases that are underway and I intend to finish the job,” James said.

     It is unclear what specific ambition James has for her future, especially given that there are no term limits on New York’s governor or its attorney general.

     While James has positioned herself as an ally to Hochul, who is seen as a more moderate Democrat, she has distanced herself from the governor on some issues. In August, James took the unusual step of declining to represent Hochul over the handling of migrants who were being brought to the state. Hochul was focused on requiring only New York City to house migrants, a requirement James said she believed applied to the whole state.

     For now, James has continued to emphasize that her focus is on the cases in her office. When she was running for her second term in 2022, a race she would win by nine points, her Republican opponent told the New York Times that she had lost sight of New York taxpayers while focusing on her own political ambitions.

     In response, James told the Times that ignoring Trump or the NRA would have been a “dereliction of my duty”.

     “We’ve been very active,” she told the paper. “And I make no apologies, because this is who I am, and this is what I do.”

     What has happened in this trial? As written by Lauren Aratani in The Guardian, in an article entitled Trump Organization civil fraud trial: five key moments; “Donald Trump’s “art of the deal” has been picked to pieces over the last three months in a New York courthouse.

     On Friday the former president was ordered to pay $354.9m, and barred from serving as an officer or director of any New York corporation or entity for three years.

     The stakes of this civil fraud trial were high. Trump stood accused of inflating his net worth on government documents. Because of the documents-focused nature of the case, it was a bench trial with no jury. Judge Arthur Engoron was the sole decider of the case.

     But that didn’t stop the former president from turning the trial into a spectacle that often resembled a mix between a campaign rally and a reality TV show.

     Forty witnesses appeared over 44 days in court. From the appearance of Trump’s three adult children to his own time on the stand, here are five key moments from Trump’s fraud trial.

  1. Pre-trial judgment sets the stage

     Engoron dropped a bombshell ruling days before the trial started. The judge said that documented evidence – millions of pages of financial statements and communications – showed Trump had committed fraud.

    In his ruling, Engoron ordered a severe punishment, revoking Trump’s business and real estate licenses, essentially barring him from doing business in New York. But Trump appealed the ruling, which is still going through appellate court.

     Still, the summary judgment was a huge victory for the attorney general’s office, and it made the trial an uphill battle for Trump’s team. Many of the arguments Trump’s lawyers used during the trial were ones Engoron had already struck down in his pre-trial ruling, like the so-called “worthless clause”.

    When Trump took the witness stand, he tried to argue that clauses on the government documents said the valuations were not vetted, making the statements themselves “worthless”. Trump even had a note about the disclaimer clause in his pocket when he was on the stand.

    “If you want to know about the disclaimer clause, read my opinion again – or for the first time, perhaps,” Engoron said, referencing his summary judgment, where he argued that the worthless clause argument was “worthless” in itself.

     Because the core of the case was decided before proceedings began, the trial itself was focused on determining the fine Trump would have to pay.

     2. Judge issues gag order against Trump

     When Engoron issued his pre-trial ruling, Trump on social media called him “deranged”, setting the antagonistic tone Trump took against Engoron from the start of the trial.

     But Trump pushed Engoron’s patience when he mocked Engoron’s principal law clerk on social media after the trial’s first day, posting a picture of the clerk with the Democratic senator Chuck Schumer and calling her “Schumer’s girlfriend”. In response to the post, Engoron issued a gag order barring Trump from speaking out publicly about members of his staff.

     Things got heated in the courtroom later on in the trial, when Trump held a press conference outside the courtroom during the testimony of Michael Cohen, his former lawyer and fixer.

     “This judge is a very partisan judge with a person who is very partisan sitting alongside him, perhaps even much more partisan than he is,” he told the cluster of reporters.

     Soon, Engoron addressed the comments in the courtroom, saying that he believed Trump was referring to his law clerk, and he was considering serious punishment for violating his gag order. Engoron allowed Trump to briefly testify that he was referring to Cohen when he made the statement. But Engoron ultimately said he did not believe Trump, fining him $10,000 for the comment.

     “I am very protective of my staff, as I should be. We all know that we are in an overheated environment,” Engoron said. “I don’t want anyone to be killed.”

     Though Trump tried to appeal Engoron’s gag order, an appellate court ultimately upheld it in January.

     Engoron’s concerns were not unfounded: court records show Engoron received an influx of death threats to his phone. On the last day of the trial, right before closing arguments, a bomb squad was sent to Engoron’s house in East New York after a serious threat.

     3. ‘Heck of a reunion’

     When he was called into the courtroom as a witness, Michael Cohen strolled into the courtroom wearing jeans. Trump sat opposite him, flanked by his lawyers, scowling at his former lawyer and fixer. In a comment to reporters on break from his testimony, Cohen called it “a heck of a reunion”.

     It was the first time Cohen had faced his former boss since they parted ways in 2017. Cohen would ultimately go to prison for three years for schemes he conducted under Trump.

     Much of Cohen’s time on the stand was focused on his credibility as a witness. Part of Cohen’s prison sentence was punishment for lying to Congress, which Trump’s lawyers said made him not a credible witness for the case.

     But at the very end of Cohen’s testimony, when Trump’s lawyers tried to dismiss the whole case based on the testimony, Engoron said he did not see Cohen as a key witness.

    “There’s enough evidence in this case to fill this courtroom,” Engoron said.

     Still, Cohen’s appearance was a reunion in more ways than one. Sitting in the audience during his testimony were two key lawyers, Susan Necheles and Susan Hoffinger, in Trump’s upcoming hush-money trial. Necheles will be representing Trump while Hoffinger will be fighting for the Manhattan district attorney’s office. That trial is set to start in March.

     Necheles and Hoffinger probably attended this trial to see how Cohen held up on the stand – he is a key witness in the case since he helped facilitate payments to the adult film star Stormy Daniels. The lawyers’ appearance served as a reminder that as this case ends, Trump’s trials are far from over.

    4. Family affair

     Over two weeks, the court was treated to a family affair. Trump’s adult children took the witness stand in a marathon of family testimony.

     Donald Trump Jr, Eric Trump and Ivanka Trump – all of whom have served or are serving as executives of the Trump Organization – were each interrogated by prosecutors over the financial statements at the center of the case. But the siblings didn’t offer much clarity, often returning to the phrase “I don’t recall” during their testimonies.

     Donald Trump Jr, the eldest son and first to testify, emphasized a point that his siblings would also make during their testimonies: when it came to the financial statements, he would “leave that to my accountants”, specifically the outside accounting firm the company hired. This is despite signing documents, prosecutors pointed out, that said the valuations in statements were the responsibility of the Trump Organization.

     Eric Trump took the brunt of questioning for his work on the family’s Seven Springs property in Westchester county, New York. Documents implied Eric was involved in valuations of the property, which the Trump family had purchased in the 90s with the hopes of developing a golf course or a cluster of luxury homes.

     Even after local residents blocked plans to develop the property, the Trump Organization listed the valuation of the property as if it could still be built on. But when Eric was asked about discrepancies on financial statements, he said he had no recollection of giving information for the statements.

     “That’s not the focus of my day. I focus on construction, I don’t focus on appraisals,” Eric Trump said during his testimony.

     5. Trump on the stand

     As a witness, Trump was prone to angry rants directed at the judge and the New York attorney general, Letitia James – things that delight his followers but probably hurt his credibility in court.

     “We have a hostile judge, and it’s sad,” Trump said, adding later that “the fraud is on behalf of the court.”

     Engoron jumped in multiple times during his testimony to remonstrate with Trump’s lawyers over their client’s unruliness.

     “I beseech you to control him or I will,” Engoron said.

     Even during the tamer moments of Trump’s testimony, he spoke wistfully and, at times, incoherently about his properties. When talking about one of his Scottish golf clubs, he said, “At some point, at a very old age, I’ll do the most beautiful thing you’ll ever see,” providing no specifics.

     Trump’s testimony confirmed what was being made clear throughout the trial, that he seemed to care more about the cameras waiting outside the courtroom that would broadcast his face and words to his followers across the country.”

     What does this mean for our future as a nation? As written by Sidney Blumenthal in The Guardian, in an article entitled Trump’s hubris has brought about the downfall of his family’s business empire; “Judge Arthur Engoron’s ruling on Friday concludes the nearly century-long history of the Trump Organization in New York in disgrace and ruin. For his financial fraud, Donald Trump must pay $355m in fines. He is suspended for three years from doing business in New York. His sons – Donald Jr and Eric, executives of the company – are barred for two years. “New York means business in combating business fraud,” the judge stated in his decision. The Trump brand is now adjudicated to be synonymous with fraud and failure.

     “In order to borrow more and at lower rates, defendants submitted blatantly false financial data to the accountants, resulting in fraudulent financial statements,” the judge wrote in his decision. “When confronted at trial with the statements, defendants’ fact and expert witnesses simply denied reality, and defendants failed to accept responsibility or to impose internal controls to prevent future recurrences … Their complete lack of contrition and remorse borders on pathological.”

     The hundreds of millions that Fred Trump bestowed on his son could not prevent him from steering the family legacy on to the rocks.

     The Trumps were Democrats. They had always been Democrats. Fred Trump had made his fortune through the Democrats. There was no Trump Organization apart from the Democratic organization of Brooklyn. Who Fred knew was what he was worth.

     In 1977, Fred Trump and Donald Trump reached a pinnacle of acceptance: they were listed as sponsors on the invitation for New York’s Salute to the President, a fundraiser for the Democratic National Committee held in the ballroom of the Waldorf Astoria. The political, corporate and social cream of the city were present to toast Jimmy Carter. The Trumps’ high-dollar donation got them an invitation to the exclusive party at the Upper East Side home of the dinner’s organizer, Arthur Krim, the chair of United Artists.

     The Trumps mingled there with Governor Hugh Carey, Mayor Abe Beame, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan and John Glenn, Hubert Humphrey and Vice-President Walter Mondale. Donald posed for a photo with the president. Between them stood an unsmiling Louise Sunshine, Fred’s executive vice-president of the Trump Organization, his all-purpose lobbyist, and finance co-chair of the New York Democratic party. She was the granddaughter of Barney Pressman, who had founded the Barney’s department store.

    Donald Trump had been working out of his father’s nondescript office on Avenue Z in Brooklyn. But he was restless being sent as his father’s rent collector. He was intent on conquering the heights of Manhattan, making all the money in the world, basking in the glow of fame and being ushered past the rope line into the pulsating clubs with the celebrities and the models. He had the arrogance and complacency of a pampered heir who wouldn’t have to claw his way upward.

     Donald was uncontrollable and Fred was controlling. Fred was self-disciplined, meticulous down to his monogrammed shirts and cufflinks, and brutally demanding. He had dispatched the unruly Donald to a military academy in his early teens hoping he would learn to conform. Now he thought he might harness Donald to be useful to the family business.

     Fred bought a new Cadillac every two years and he wanted Donald to be more than the equivalent of a hood ornament. His older son, Fred Jr, his namesake, had sorely disappointed him. Resisting Fred’s pressure, Fred Jr had gone off to become an airline pilot, only to become an alcoholic, and was at the moment living in the top floor of the Trump home in Queens. Fred had ordered his sons to be “killers”. Fred and Donald derided Fred Jr as a loser. Fred’s hopes devolved on to his second son.

    Fred was hardly an outlier among the powerful at Krim’s townhouse. He had helped make many of the New York politicians there. They were among his closest friends, some since the 1930s and 1940s. Donald trailed after Fred through the crowd until finally Fred located the DNC official with whom he had arranged his donation.

      The DNC official, a friend of mine, recalled that Fred had asked him: “Wouldn’t it be great if Donald got experience in Washington?” Clearly, he wanted to get Donald a gig so that he could make national connections. Donald’s expression was unhappy. He opened his mouth, getting out only a couple of words: “Well, I … ”

     Fred cut him off before he could say anything else. “Shut the fuck up,” he said sternly. “We didn’t fucking ask you. Who the fuck cares what you think?” And Donald shut up. The official told Fred he would look into it. But Donald wasn’t interested in Washington, at least not then.

     Donald Trump had crossed the East River into Manhattan with the ambition to be the king of the heap. Walking through Central Park in 1974 with the manager of the bankrupt Penn Central yards he sought to develop, he boasted: “I’ll be bigger than all of them. I’ll be bigger than Helmsley in five years.” To attain the stratospheric level of Helmsley was Donald’s ultimate aspiration.

     He was referring to Harry Helmsley, the billionaire real estate developer, owner of the Empire State Building and other trademark properties, married to the flamboyant Leona Helmsley, notorious tabloid grist as the Queen of Mean. (In 1988, Helmsley was charged with financial fraud for inflating the value of his buildings and tax evasion, but was judged too frail to stand trial, while Leona was convicted and sent to prison.)

     Then, Trump and the Penn Central manager walked down Lexington Avenue, where a tabloid headline shrieked about the arrest of a New Jersey mayor for taking an $800,000 bribe. “There is no goddamn mayor in America worth $800,000,” Trump said, according to his biographer, Wayne Barrett. “I can buy a US senator for $200,000.”

     But Donald had not bought any politicians. He stood on his father’s wealth and connections surveying the island he planned to capture as his own. Donald would catapult to the top by starting at the top.

     Fred Trump built his real estate empire favor by favor, brick by brick. From the 1930s onward, starting in Flatbush, relying on the New Deal program of the Federal Housing Authority to underwrite loans, he made millions, then tens of millions, then more. He was the biggest operator in Brooklyn. He built thousands of homes and owned tens of thousands of apartments. He didn’t want to edge into the Manhattan market, where the land prices were high and the competition fierce. He had Brooklyn wired.

     Fred was an indispensable player in the borough’s political machine. His rise in Brooklyn would explain Donald’s calculation about invading Manhattan. In the naked city, Fred’s story was inextricable from that of the Madison Democratic Club. He stood at the center of a dense network of patronage, influence and money. From his relationships and donations flowed land deals and tax abatements. The clubhouse was his cornucopia.

     Fred’s clout originated with his relationship with the Brooklyn political boss Irwin Steingut, a powerful member of the New York state assembly for 30 years and once the speaker. His chief fundraiser, Abe “Bunny” Lindenbaum, provided the insurance for Fred’s buildings. On Steingut’s recommendation, he became Fred’s attorney. Steingut’s accountant and Lindenbaum’s closest friend, Abe Beame, became the city comptroller.

      Fred Trump and Beame were friends for 30 years, with Trump financially backing his career for decades. After Steingut’s death in 1952, his son Stanley succeeded him in the assembly and as the Brooklyn boss. Fred’s biggest project, Trump Village, received approval from the city planning commission and the board of estimate in 1960 after Lindenbaum and Steingut lobbied its key members. Fred got a 72% tax write-off on a parcel, too. A week later, Lindenbaum became the city’s new planning commissioner.

     Beame was elected mayor in 1973 and Stanley Steingut became speaker of the state assembly two years later. Moreover, Hugh Carey had been elected governor in 1974; Bunny and the Trumps were the first donors to his campaign. The Trumps had co-signed a loan for $23,000 to open his headquarters. The influence of the Brooklyn machine – and Fred Trump – was at its peak.

     Donald not only had his eye on the Penn Central yards but also spotted the seedy Commodore hotel next to Grand Central Station. The part-owners of the Penn Central property were owners of the hotel. He thought he could get a two-for-one bargain. Donald got an agreement from the Hyatt hotels to manage it, but it was non-binding. He needed a huge tax abatement to finance the $80m renovation to pay the mortgage and property taxes. This is when the art of the deal kicked in. Its secret was the friends of Fred Trump.

     Beame and Steingut got behind a bill in the assembly crafted to provide exactly this unique type of tax abatement. Unfortunately, the assembly was overwhelmed with the city fiscal crisis and adjourned before passing it in the 1975 session. Beame’s administrator for the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation, Michael Bailkin, devised a scheme for Trump to buy the Commodore from Penn Central and donate it to the city, which would pay the taxes to itself and lease it to Trump for 99 years, who would reap the benefits but pay no taxes.

     Donald hired a lawyer, Bunny Lindenbaum’s son, Samuel “Sandy” Lindenbaum, who would become renowned as the “dean of zoning”. The idea of the 99-year lease wouldn’t fly. If the city owned the hotel, it would have to put it up for sale to public bidding. So Bailkin proposed using the state’s Urban Development Corporation as a vehicle to give the tax exemptions and evade public bidding.

     Promising this to the brash young Donald was a problem. Mayor Beame had his deputy John Zuccotti check in with Fred, who promised he’d oversee it all. That satisfied Beame, who announced the project as the first of his brand-new business incentive program. But it still had to pass the board of estimate, where there was static from the Hotel Association, led by Helmsley, peeved because its operators would not get the tax abatement under the plan.

     Louise Sunshine, Fred’s right-hand person in the Trump Organization, also fundraising for Governor Carey’s re-election, happened to be hired just then as the lobbyist for the UDC. She arranged with Carey’s chief counsel, Charles Goldstein, for the city development chief, Richard Kahan, to be appointed the new UDC head, who wrote Donald a letter approving the terms of the Commodore deal. But it still had to pass the hurdles of the board of estimate and the bureau of franchises.

     Stanley Friedman, the deputy mayor and former secretary of the Bronx Democratic organization, took charge. He enlisted help in wrangling quid pro quos from Roy Cohn, mob lawyer extraordinaire, another heir to power, whose father had been an influential judge in the Bronx. Cohn happened to be the lawyer for the Commodore. The consent agreement was rewritten so that Donald would pay less in franchise fees for using public space than the hotel restaurant would earn in a day. The boards approved the deal.

     But there was one more requirement. There would be no mortgage unless it was financially guaranteed by a third party. Donald himself didn’t have the money. The banks lacked confidence in him and withheld financing. Fred stepped forward to sign the guarantee. Only then did the banks provide the money.

     “When it came to the financial bottom line of the deal, Donald was barely a factor,” wrote Wayne Barrett. An investigative reporter for the Village Voice, Barrett was the most dedicated pursuer of fact about Trump’s financial chicanery for decades.

     The day after Beame left office, with the deal signed, sealed and delivered, Stanley Friedman joined Cohn’s law firm. (He would be convicted of corruption in 1986 and sentenced to prison.)

     The Commodore deal was the making of Donald Trump. All his father’s powers had been exerted invisibly to move the pieces. Donald entered into Cohn’s demimonde for the first time. While Cohn applied his dark arts to secure the Commodore, he convinced Donald to force his fiancé, Ivana Winklmayr, to sign a harsh pre-nuptial agreement. Donald owed him. Roy was a man for all seasons. Donald brought Roy as his guest to the Carter event. Roy hated Carter.

     Donald stomped through the city like he was King Kong. He built Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue with ready-mix cement from the mob, the “Concrete Club”, they called it, provided by Anthony “Fat Tony” Salerno, boss of the Genovese crime family, the client of Roy Cohn, and under the supervision of teamster boss John Cody, under the control of Paul Castellano, boss of the Gambino crime family. Cody bought an apartment for his mistress in the completed building without filing a loan application to show his income.

     (Cody was convicted of labor racketeering in 1982 and sentenced to prison. Salerno was convicted in 1988 and sent to prison. His contract for concrete to build Trump Plaza was listed in his indictment as one of the charges of racketeering. Castellano was assassinated at Sparks Steak House in Manhattan in 1985 on the orders of John Gotti, who assumed control of the Gambino family.)

     “If people were like me, there would be no mob, because I don’t play that game,” Trump said when asked later about his ties to what he called “OC”, or organized crime. He called himself “the cleanest guy there is”.

     Fred’s Cadillac bore the vanity license plate “FCT”. (His middle name, from his mother’s family, was “Christ”.) Louise Sunshine arranged a little present for Donald to get his own vanity license plate reading “DJT”.

     He wanted to shake off the image of the outer borough. He raced in his limo from Fifth Avenue to a red banquette at 21 for lunch with Roy, to leering at the celebs and models frolicking at Studio 54.

     Donald tried to imitate Fred’s methods, but misunderstood them. Fred had slowly nurtured relationships with the Brooklyn clubhouse. The line between business and friendship was seamless. There were Brooklyn Democratic dinners where Fred brought his family. He hosted lavish parties at the country club, inviting everyone and their families. He knew how to become the godfather. But when Beame left office, Fred’s glory days of connections were fading.

     Donald was crass, belligerent and bullying. He believed that the conspicuous display of gold-plated wealth showed an irresistible Midas touch and that all publicity was good publicity. He threw $70,000 in campaign contributions at Ed Koch, who replaced Beame, and turned up at his election night victory party to celebrate like he had made Koch.

     Koch, a former reform Democrat, was voluble and insecure, with a penchant for turning political disagreements into personal battles. Trump yelled at him for easements and tax abatements. Koch detested him. “I wouldn’t believe Donald Trump if his tongue were notarized,” he said.

     Trump bloated his holdings, emblazoning his name in gold letters on everything he could get his hands on. He bought the Eastern airline shuttle and renamed it the Trump shuttle. He started the United States Football League. He built the Taj Mahal casino in Atlantic City. He dumped Ivana for an actress, Marla Maples.

     And he floated his greatest scheme of all, a multibillion-dollar complex over the West Side railyards, “a new mini-city on the Hudson River … containing thousands of luxury apartments, the world’s tallest building, a huge shopping mall and a television studio complex that he said would be ‘the largest and most spectacular’ in the world,” according to the New York Times. He called it Television City. In his plan, NBC would relocate from Rockefeller Center. Then he changed its name to Trump City. He would rebrand New York in his own image.

     After seeming to approve the deal, Koch killed it in 1987. He wouldn’t become in effect Trump’s partner through tax abatements and zoning. The Television City debacle was the reverse of the Commodore bonanza. Trump called Koch “a moron”, and Koch called him “greedy, greedy, greedy”, and said that if he was “squealing like a stuck pig, I must have done something right”. The house of cards began to crumble.

     Trump tried to cover his financial crisis with stories about his sex life. He leaked to the New York Post a fake quote, supposedly Maples’ statement about his sexual prowess, timed for just after Valentine’s Day 1990, splashed on the front page: Best Sex I Ever Had.

     Spy magazine, edited by Kurt Andersen and Graydon Carter, had pegged Trump as “a short-fingered vulgarian” from the start. Along with the Village Voice, Spy pointed out Trump’s financial trickery for years. In April 1991, it published a compendium: How to Fool All of the People, All of the Time: How Donald Trump Fooled the Media, Used the Media to Fool the Banks, Used the Banks to Fool the Bondholders, and Used the Bondholders to Pay for the Yachts and Mansions and Mistresses.

     Trump’s Atlantic City properties were leveraged with debt to the hilt. In November 1991, he failed to meet the debt payment. Fred dispatched a lawyer to buy $3.35m in chips at the Trump Castle casino to give Donald cash to meet the bill. The New Jersey gaming authorities found him guilty of violating the Casino Control Act and fined him $33,000. In 1998, the US Treasury fined Donald’s casino $477,000.

     Trump filed six bankruptcies. He was forced to sell his airline, the Plaza Hotel on Fifth Avenue and his yacht, named Princess for his daughter Ivanka. The Taj Mahal and the Castle went belly up. Fortune dumped him from its list of billionaires. Forbes reported he had a negative net worth. The New York banks cut him off from future loans. They put him on an allowance to give him a chance to repay part of his debts. His casino company filed for bankruptcy protection in 2014 for the fifth time.

     Trump eventually found a new lender to guarantee loans in Deutsche Bank. Its records were subpoenaed in the New York state financial fraud case. “The bank did not trust all of Trump’s numbers, but it underestimated the depth of Trump’s lies,” Forbes reported in 2023.

     What If You Could Have It All? read the chyron to the throbbing beat of the O’Jays’ For the Love of Money, to open The Apprentice television series in 2004, featuring Trump striding as the master of the universe. His limo, his helicopter, his Trump Tower and even the bankrupt Taj Mahal flashed as fantasy images of his brilliant success. He was the top of the list, king of the hill, a No 1.

     During the 2016 campaign, Donald lied that he was a self-made man who started with a measly $1m loan from Fred. But the New York Times, after reviewing his tax records, determined in 2018 that he had “received the equivalent today of at least $413m from his father’s real estate empire”.

     Fred died in 1999. He is not here to buy the chips.”

     As gratifying as this is, and as necessary as a morality play in which justice is restored to America, it does not bring a Reckoning for the historical sources of the Trump family fortune patriarchs before the orange clown; his grandfather’s trafficking of Native American women abducted in slave raiding and imprisoned in his network of brothels during the Klondike Gold Rush in Alaska. The baroque perversions and atrocities of sexual terror of Traitor Trump began not with his role in the crimes of his buddy Epstein, but with multigenerational depravity and the psychopathy of power.

     That Reckoning is yet to come.

Let us celebrate our liberation with the people of New York from the regime of the Trump crime family

Ding Dong the Witch is dead song, Wizard of Oz

Elegy For a Swindler King: “You gotta admit, I played this stinkin city like a harp from hell” line of Penguin in the film Batman Returns

Letitia James: the New York state attorney general who brought down the Trump Organization

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/feb/17/who-is-letitia-james-new-york-ag-trump-fraud-trial?CMP=share_btn_link

Trump Organization civil fraud trial: five key moments

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/feb/16/trump-fraud-case-trial-moments

Trump’s hubris has brought about the downfall of his family’s business empire

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/feb/17/trump-hubris-family-empire-new-york

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started