Biden vs Trump 2024 from Now till November 5, 2024

[Sixties Fan]

Unlike the bulk of the corporate media, I do not think we should let this go without comment:



Nothing to see here . . . ¯\(ツ)/¯
Donald posted this on Truth Social, the social media network I used to think of as Twitter for Nazis until, well, Twitter became Twitter for Nazis. Clearly somebody had alerted him to an article about General Mark Milley in The Atlantic, “The Patriot: How General Mark Milley protected the Constitution from Donald Trump,” which had been published early on Thursday September 21. Milley, who had been Donald’s Chairman of the Joint Chiefs from December 2018 until January 20, 2021, is retiring on October 1st. The article is part overview of his long career in the military, part profile, and part assessment of his performance during his two-year tenure.

It’s also an assessment, at least from the point of view of Gen. Milley and other military officers who had the great misfortune of serving during the Trump administration, of Donald. None of it is positive and almost all of it is bound to provoke him, even if unintentionally

A mentor of Milley’s essentially says that, after 200 years, we can no longer assume that “we would have a stable person as president.” High-ranking people in Donald’s orbit refer to him as “the most flawed person.”

Milley himself describes Donald’s behavior on January 6 as “shameful,” and “complicit,” and Milley was deeply concerned about Donald’s “ ‘Hitler-like’ embrace of the big lie about the election would prompt the president to seek out a ‘Reichstag moment.’ ”

Share

It is the portrait of a vicious, ignorant, man-child who needed to be treated with kid gloves because of his lack of impulse control and supra-abundance of vindictiveness. If we didn’t know any better, it would come across as a caricature.

So, of course, in a fit of pique, Donald posts a suggestion that Gen. Milley would have been executed at an earlier time in American history (presumably back when we were “great”). In the run-up to the 2020 election, in the wake of Donald’s erratic behavior and irresponsible threats against China, Milley spoke with his Chinese counterpart in order to assuage his fears that, as intelligence suggested, officials in China were deeply concerned that Donald was going to launch an actual attack against them.

Milley’s stated goal was to “deconflict military actions, manage crisis, and prevent war between great powers that are armed with the world’s most deadliest weapons.”

There are plenty of things to criticize about Milley’s time as head of the Joint Chiefs, the worst of which was his participation in the walk to Lafayette Square during George Floyd protests for which he has repeatedly apologized. And there is a theoretical conversation to be had about Milley’s behind-the scenes maneuverings that, one could potentially argue, undermined the authority of his commander-in-chief.

Whichever way that conversation plays out, however, it is Donald’s threats—which are becoming more extreme and increasingly pointed—that are not at all theoretical.

Do we think his amped up followers, who’ve been wallowing in the juices of Donald’s grievances four over six years now, are going to read Donald’s post as mere historical commentary? No. Neither does Donald. That’s why he posts such things. He knows what his followers will believe after reading, “in times gone by, the punishment would have been DEATH.” They will believe that Gen. Milley betrayed Donald and therefore deserves to die.

After the surreally bad NBC interview with Kristen Welker, I wrote: “the unchallenged lies sink in, adding to the sense that all transgressions—against truth, decency, American democracy—are already ‘baked in,’ and that sussing out the truth, or holding him accountable in any way, is just so much noise.”

Ignoring this direct threat to Milley needs to be seen in this context as well. Wake up, media. It’s long past time.

Crossing the Line

And letting it slide

marytrump.substack.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

This hurts and I’m tired of it.The horrible new ABC News/Washington Post poll finds Donald ahead by 9 points against President Biden.The MEDIA is to blame for this.In 2016, watching broadcast and cable news normalize Donald, a corrupt and incompetent man, was very difficult for me to endure. They presented him as if he were a legitimate candidate, despite the many failures and crimes he’d left in his path for over 60 years. They had no problem airing his rallies in full; they ignored credible allegations of business fraud and sexual assault—as well as actual evidence of his multiple bankruptcies, horrific treatment of treatment of workers, and gob-smacking failure as a “deal-maker.”And you know what’s horrifying? They are doing it again. And this time, it’s worse.

As cable news organizations struggle for ratings, they spend more time talking about Biden’s age than Donald’s 4 indictments, 91 criminal charges, and disastrous first terms. Plus, Biden is only THREE years older than Donald!!! In 2016, Donald was the oldest president in history to be elected and no one talked about his age. That’s because this narrative is complete bullshit.

It is not normal for someone with 91 criminal charges across four jurisdictions to be a party’s front runner for president. It’s not normal for the media to talk about a man who’s accused of launching a coup against our country as a legitimate candidate. It’s not normal for the media to talk about a man who was found legally responsible for rape as a legitimate candidate. None of this is normal.

I know this poll is an outlier, but in a sane country Biden would be ahead by 40 points. In a healthy, functioning democracy, Donald would not even be allowed to run.I’m fighting back in part by cataloguing in my newsletter not just his crimes but the crimes and complicity of his enablers. We know the corporate media won’t do it on their own. Help me get the word out before the media’s kid glove treatment gets Donald back into the White House.

We can’t let that happen

 

[Sixties Fan]

[ Let everyone vote for a person who wants to do away with the First Amendment and Freedom of the Press. Isn't that what makes a Democracy? Doing away with one's critics? A Former President NOT respecting the Constitution and the First Amendment and blatantly and clearly saying that he is going to do away with the FIRST Amendment.
It is the FIRST for a reason, but nothing seems to matter on the way to a Dictatorship. Trump's words, folks, nobody else's. ]

Last night, a couple of Trump tweets raging about "fraudulent" postal ballots in US elections featured - for some users but not all - a strapline linking to what Twitter called "facts about mail-in ballots."
This then led to a page debunking the president's claims but featuring articles from two organisations he regards as his sworn enemies, CNN and the Washington Post.

It took him no time to fight back, tweeting: "Twitter is completely stifling free speech, and I, as President, will not allow it to happen."
Then, on Wednesday morning, the president woke up and raised the temperature even further with this two-part tweet:

IMAGE SOURCE, TWITTER

"Republicans feel that social-media platforms totally silence conservatives voices.

"We will strongly regulate, or close them down, before we can ever allow this to happen.
"We saw what they attempted to do, and failed, in 2016.

"We can't let a more sophisticated version of that... happen again - just like we can't let largescale mail-in ballots take root in our country.

"It would be a free-for-all on cheating, forgery and the theft of ballots.
"Whoever cheated the most would win.
"Likewise, social media.
"Clean up your act, now."

Conspiracy theories​

So does he mean any of this?

It is very hard to see Congress passing laws to strongly regulate or close down social-media platforms.

The president refers to free speech.
But as a private company, Twitter is free to police its platform as it sees fit.

Nevertheless, for Twitter's chief executive, Jack Dorsey, this is undoubtedly just the start of a clash that will continue right up until the November election.

In recent days, he has been under huge pressure to do something about President Trump's tweets.
Now, he has acted but not in a way that might have been expected.

There has been a furore over the way the president has used Twitter seemingly to endorse a baseless conspiracy theory about one of his critics, the TV presenter and former Republican Congressman Joe Scarborough.


(full article online)

Trump threatens to shut down social media companies

The president claims Twitter is "stifling free speech", after it added fact-check links to his posts.

www.bbc.com

 

[dblack]

Just say "No!"

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

VIDEO OF THE DAY: Trump descends into utter confusion on stage

The media has been so fixated on President Biden's age that they've completely overlooked the increasingly apparent signs that the serially indicted, disgraced ex-president is in a state of mental decline — which, to be fair, isn't saying much given his baseline cognitive abilities. Case in point? During a recent campaign stop in South Carolina, Trump claimed that — why not — Jeb Bush “got us into the Middle East." If Biden had said this, we'd be pummeled with wall-to-wall coverage on TV.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Trump's labor record will trail him as he wades into UAW strike

The former president’s plans to show up for autoworkers are more overt than Joe Biden’s. But Trump’s track record has its holes.

www.politico.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

But during his four years in power, Trump took an openly hostile stance toward workers, stacking the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with anti-union officials, gutting Labor Department regulations aimed at protecting workers' wages and benefits, and nominating Supreme Court justices and agency heads with long histories of siding with companies over employees—all while delivering huge tax cuts to the rich and big corporations, including major automakers.

"At every turn, Donald Trump and his appointees have made increasing the power of corporations over working people their top priority," the Communications Workers of America wrote while the former president was still in office. "Trump has encouraged freeloaders, made it more difficult to enforce collective bargaining agreements, silenced workers, and restricted the freedom to join unions."

It's no surprise, then, that Trump's 2024 presidential campaign is glossing over the actual substance of his record as the billionaire former president and current Republican frontrunner attempts to insert himself into one of the most significant labor actions in decades.
-----------
"The last time Donald Trump 'visited' striking union workers, it was to cross our picket line against 'The Apprentice' in 2004," the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees wrote in a social media post on Tuesday.

"Now he wants to visit a UAW picket line? When billionaires show you what they think of labor, believe them," the union added.

It's far from clear that Trump would get a warm reception from the roughly 13,000 autoworkers who are currently on strike in Missouri, Ohio, and Michigan—a number that's expected to grow in the coming days if management does not meet the UAW's demands for substantial wage and benefit improvements.


(full article online)

Trump's viciously anti-worker record in the spotlight ahead of Detroit trip

Posturing as a friend and ally of the working class, former President Donald Trump is planning to travel to Detroit next week amid the historic United Auto Workers strike against General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis.But during his four years in power, Trump took an openly hostile stance toward...

www.rawstory.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

The GOP debate is tomorrow. You’re forgiven if the race for second place didn’t make your watch schedule.

For the sake of ratings and fake normalcy, the moderators will pretend this is a regular presidential debate.

They’ll pretend these candidates have real policy positions and they’ll pretend that the base is actually interested in the nuances of Desantis’ and Ramaswamy’s immigration policies (one wants to invade our Southern neighbor and the other wants to launch airstrikes – don’t let anyone tell you that the GOP has any sense of reason left.)

The point is, no candidate on stage tomorrow will answer the actual questions facing the Republican Party.

Do you stand with Trump’s open fascism?

What crime could Trump commit that deserves a prison sentence?

Do you believe the United States should let authoritarians invade sovereign countries?

How about the shutdown Trump wants in an attempt to defund his prosecutors?

They won’t answer those questions because they either don’t care or they know their voters don’t care. That’s the point of a cult. There’s no real internal disagreement. It’s the whims of the deranged MAGA base.



The Lincoln Project

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

Americans Are Sleepwalking Through a National Emergency

Serious times require serious citizens.

www.theatlantic.com

Letâs Not Sleepwalk Into Another Donald Trump Presidency

The GOP front-runner’s “treason” talk makes clear, yet again, that he’s a danger to democracy.

www.vanityfair.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

Former President Donald Trump began his 2024 presidential campaign just as he ended his presidency in 2021: with a whole lot of inaccuracy.

Like many of Trump’s speeches as president, his announcement speech at his Mar-a-Lago resort on Tuesday was filled with false claims about a variety of topics – from his record in office to his Democratic opponents to the economy, the environment and foreign policy.

Here is a fact check of 20 false or misleading things he said. This is not a comprehensive list.

Afghanistan withdrawal​

Trump claimed Tuesday evening that the US left $85 billion worth of military equipment in Afghanistan upon its military withdrawal in 2021.

“Perhaps the most embarrassing moment in the history of our country, where we lost lives, left Americans behind and surrendered $85 billion worth of the finest military equipment anywhere in the world,” Trump said.


Facts First: Trump’s figure is false. While a significant quantity of military equipment that had been provided by the US to Afghan government forces was indeed abandoned to the Taliban upon the US withdrawal, the Defense Department has estimated that this equipment had been worth about $7.1 billion — a chunk of about $18.6 billion worth of equipment provided to Afghan forces between 2005 and 2021. And some of the equipment left behind was rendered inoperable before US forces withdrew.

There is not any basis for Trump’s claim that $85 billion worth of equipment was left behind. As other fact-checkers have previously explained, that was a rounded-up figure (it’s closer to $83 billion) for the total amount of money Congress has appropriated during the war to a fund supporting the Afghan security forces. Only part of this funding was for equipment.

Strategic Petroleum Reserve​

Trump claimed his administration “filled up” the Strategic Petroleum Reserve but it has now been “virtually drained” by the Biden administration.

Facts First: Both parts of Trump’s claim are false. He didn’t fill up the reserve, and the reserve is not “virtually drained.”

Though Trump has repeatedly boasted of supposedly having filled up the reserve, it actually contained fewer barrels of crude when he left office in early 2021 than when he took office in 2017. That’s not all because of him – the law requires some mandatory sales from the reserve for budget reasons, and Democrats in Congress blocked the funding needed to execute Trump’s 2020 directive to buy tens of millions more barrels and fill the reserve to its maximum capacity – but nonetheless, it didn’t get filled.

As CNN’s Matt Egan and Phil Mattingly reported in mid-October, the US reserve remains the largest in the world even though it was at a 38-year low after President Joe Biden released a major chunk of it to help keep oil prices down in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine (and, coincidentally or not, prior to the midterm elections). The reserve had more than 396 million barrels of crude oil as of the week ending November 4.

Tariffs on China​

Trump also boasted about his tariffs on China, claiming that “no president had ever sought or received $1 for our country from China until I came along.”

Facts First: As we have written repeatedly, it’s not true that no president before Trump had generated any revenue through tariffs on goods from China. In reality, the US has had tariffs on China for more than two centuries, and FactCheck.org reportedin 2019 that the US generated an “average of $12.3 billion in custom duties a year from 2007 to 2016, according to the U.S. International Trade Commission DataWeb.”

Also, American importers, not Chinese exporters, make the actual tariff payments – and study after study during Trump’s presidency found that Americans were bearing the cost of the tariffs.

Sea level rise​

Trump claimed that unnamed people aren’t talking about the threat of nuclear weapons because they are obsessed with environmental issues, which he said, “they say may affect us in 300 years.” He added, “They say the ocean will rise 1/8 of an inch over the next 200 to 300 years. But don’t worry about nuclear weapons that can take out entire countries with one shot.”

Facts First: Trump’s claims are false – even if you ignore the absurd contention that people aren’t paying attention to nuclear threats because they’re focused on the environment. Sea levels are expected to rise much faster than Trump said. The US government’s National Ocean Service said on its website that “sea level along the U.S. coastline is projected to rise, on average, 10 - 12 inches (0.25 - 0.30 meters) in the next 30 years (2020 - 2050), which will be as much as the rise measured over the last 100 years (1920 - 2020).”

And though Trump didn’t use the words “climate change” in this claim, he strongly suggested that people say climate change may only affect us in 300 years. That is grossly inaccurate; it is affecting the US today. The Department of Defense said in a 2021 report: “Increasing temperatures; changing precipitation patterns; and more frequent, intense, and unpredictable extreme weather conditions caused by climate change are exacerbating existing risks and creating new security challenges for U.S. interests.”

Drug use and punishment in China​

Trump claimed that Chinese leader Xi Jinping had told him that China has no “drug problem” at all because of its harsh treatment of drug traffickers. Trump then repeated the claim himself, saying, “if you get caught dealing drugs in China you have an immediate and quick trial, and by the end of the day, you are executed. That’s a terrible thing, but they have no drug problem.”

Facts First: Trump’s claim is not true, just as it was when he made similar claims as president. Joe Amon, director of global health at Drexel University’s Dornsife School of Public Health, said that “yes, China has a drug problem” and that “China, like the US, has a large number of people who use (a wide range of) drugs.” The Chinese government has itself reported that “there were 1.49 million registered drug users nationwide” as of the end of 2021; in the past, officials in China have acknowledged that the number of registered drug users are a significant undercount of actual drug use there.

And while Trump solely credits harsh punishments for what he claims is China’s success in handling drugs, the Chinese government also touts its rehabilitation, education and anti-poverty efforts.

Presidential records​

Complaining about how he is under criminal investigation for taking presidential documents to his Florida home and resort, Trump repeated a debunked claim about former President Barack Obama’s handling of presidential documents.

“Obama took a lot of things with him,” Trump said.

Facts First: This is false – as the National Archives and Records Administration pointed out in August when Trump previously made this claim. Though Trump claimed that Obama had taken millions of records to Chicago, NARA explained in a public statement that it had itself taken these records to a NARA-managed facility in the Chicago area – which is near where Obama’s presidential library will be located. It said that, as per federal law, “former President Obama has no control over where and how NARA stores the Presidential records of his Administration.”

NARA has also debunked Trump’s recent claims about various other presidents having supposedly taken documents to their own home states; in those cases, too, it was NARA that moved the documents, not the former presidents. It is standard for NARA to set up temporary facilities near where former presidents’ permanent libraries will eventually be located.

Gas prices​

As he has on other occasions during Biden’s tenure, Trump used misleading figures when discussing the price of gas. He said: “We were $1.87 a gallon for gasoline, and now it’s sitting five, six, seven and even eight dollars, and it’s gonna go really bad.”

Facts First: This is so misleading that we’re classifying it as inaccurate. While the price of a gallon of regular gas did briefly fall to $1.87 (and lower) during the depths of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020, the national average for regular gas on Trump’s last day in office, January 20, 2021, was much higher than that – $2.393 per gallon, according to data provided to CNN by the American Automobile Association. And while there are some remote gas stations where prices are always much higher than the national average, the national average Tuesday is $3.759, per AAA data, not $5, $6, $7 or $8. California, the state with the highest prices as usual, has an average of $5.423.

Deportations under Obama​

Trump claimed Tuesday evening that his administration, unlike Obama’s administration, had convinced countries like Guatemala and Honduras to take back their gang members that had come to America.

“The worst gangs are MS-13. And under the Barack Hussein Obama administration, they were unable to take them out. Because their countries where they came from wouldn’t take them,” Trump said from Mar-a-Lago.

Facts First: It’s not true that, as a rule, Guatemala and Honduras wouldn’t take back their citizens during Obama’s administration, though there were some individual exceptions.

In 2016, just prior to Trump’s presidency, neither Guatemala nor Honduras was on the list of countries that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) considered “recalcitrant,” or uncooperative, in accepting the return of their nationals.

For the 2016 fiscal year, Obama’s last full fiscal year in office, ICE reported Guatemala and Honduras ranked second and third, behind only Mexico, in terms of the country of citizenship of people being removed from the US. You can read a longer fact check, from 2019, here.


(full article online)

https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/15/politics/fact-check-trump-announcement-speech-2024/index.html

 

[Sixties Fan]

[ Where will Trump be tonight? Not at the Debate where there may be a few questions about some of these......]

 

[Sixties Fan]

Why Won't Donald Trump Show Up to Debate? - Opinion: Potomac Watch - WSJ Podcasts

The second Republican debate is scheduled next week, but Donald Trump will instead give a speech to union workers in Detroit. Does he not think voters deserve to hear his positions on abortion, Ukraine, his electability, and more? Plus, a new poll in New Hampshire puts Ron DeSantis in fifth...

www.wsj.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

[ In a debate between Trump and Biden, which is bound to happen, will Trump address this? ]

 

[Sixties Fan]

Trump offered his support to striking members of the United Auto Workers but demanded the union’s official endorsement or else warned of their imminent extinction. He excoriated Biden administration policies encouraging domestic investment in electric vehicles, calling them an existential danger to U.S. manufacturing and describing efforts to limit planet-warming emissions as irreconcilable with auto industry jobs. [...]

Trump spoke at a nonunion business, Drake Enterprises, to an audience that included some striking and nonstriking UAW members, as well as nonunionized industry workers and others who retired or left the industry. The campaign distributed signs saying autoworkers and union members for Trump, not all of which ended up in the hands of autoworkers or union members.

Unions have historically supported Democrats, and Biden won Michigan’s union households by 62 percent to Trump’s 37 percent, according to 2020 exit polls. But Trump has made inroads with working-class voters who traditionally voted for Democrats and is trying to peel off rank-and-file union members from their leaders, a bid to repeat his gains with Midwestern blue-collar workers that helped him win the electoral college in 2016.

(full article online)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/09/27/trump-detroit-strike-autoworkers/?link_id=6&can_id=6e84143cce349aec0c9a0b4e4a28c9c6&source=email-the-republican-debate-is-fake&email_referrer=email_2061484&email_subject=the-republican-debate-is-fake

 

[Sixties Fan]

Former President Donald Trump used his speech at a nonunion plant in Clinton Township, Michigan Wednesday night to simultaneously posture as a lifelong champion of workers and denigrate the United Auto Workers' historic strike against the Big Three U.S. car manufacturers, dismissing the union's fight for better wages and benefits as effectively meaningless.

"I don't care what you get in the next two weeks or three weeks or five weeks," Trump said. "They're going to be closing up and they're going to be building those cars in China and other places. It's a hit job in Michigan and on Detroit."

It was a theme the former president and 2024 GOP frontrunner hit repeatedly throughout his remarks at Drake Enterprises, a truck parts manufacturer that offered to host Trump's rally: The electric vehicle transition and the Biden administration's efforts to accelerate it are going to send jobs overseas and leave the U.S. automobile industry in ruins.

"It doesn't make a damn bit of difference what you get because in two years you're all going to be out of business, you're not getting anything," Trump said. "I mean, I watch you out there with the pickets, but I don't think you're picketing for the right thing."

The former president repeatedly and falsely accused the Biden administration of attempting to bring about a "transition to hell" and impose "electric vehicle mandates that will spell the death of the American auto industry," a narrative that was also prominent during the Republican primary debate that Trump skipped.


Kevin Munoz, a spokesperson for President Joe Biden's 2024 reelection campaign, said in response that Trump is "lying about President Biden's agenda to distract from his failed track record of trickle-down tax cuts, closed factories, and jobs outsourced to China." During Trump's four years in office, the offshoring of U.S. jobs increased.

"There is no 'EV mandate.' Simply put: Trump had the United States losing the EV race to China and if he had his way, the jobs of the future would be going to China," said Munoz. "President Biden is delivering where Donald Trump failed by bringing manufacturing back home, and with it, good-paying jobs for the American people."

As HuffPost's Jonathan Cohn reported late Wednesday, "Since Biden took office in January 2021, total auto industry employment in the U.S. has risen from about 948,000 to 1,073,000 jobs, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. That's a monthly rate of about 4,000 new auto jobs a month."

Challenging the notion that the Biden administration's EV policies are imperiling the U.S. auto industry, Cohn noted that electric vehicle subsidies in the Inflation Reduction Act "will close the cost gap so that companies manufacturing electric vehicles and their parts can compete."

"And there are lots of signs that the effort is working," Cohn wrote. "Auto companies have announced plans to build literally dozens of new factories in the U.S., many in what's coming to be known as the 'battery belt,' stretching from Georgia in the South to Michigan in the North. They are expected to generate hundreds of thousands of jobs directly, plus many more (along with economic growth) indirectly."

The UAW leadership has made clear that, unlike Trump, it doesn't oppose the transition to electric vehicles.

Rather, the union wants policymakers to ensure that EV manufacturing jobs are unionized. UAW president Shawn Fain has criticized Biden—who joined union members on the picket line earlier this week—for not doing enough to prevent a "race to the bottom" in the EV transition as automakers increasingly invest in the nonunion U.S. South.

Fain has also not been shy about his feelings toward the former president.

"I don't think the man has any bit of care about what our workers stand for, what the working class stands for," Fain said in a CNN appearance on Tuesday. "He serves the billionaire class, and that's what's wrong with this country."

Trump—who has repeatedly called on the UAW to endorse his presidential run—didn't respond Wednesday when asked by a reporter whether he supports the union's push for a nearly 40% wage increase for autoworkers, who have seen their hourly pay decline sharply over the past two decades.

During his speech, Trump "didn't specifically address demands made by autoworkers, other than to say he would protect jobs in a way that would lead to higher wages," the Detroit Free Pressreported.

"But he left it unclear how he would do so," the newspaper added, "given that he didn't demand specific wage increases as president."

It's not clear how many union members were in the audience at Trump's speech, though some were waving "Auto Workers for Trump" and "Union Members for Trump" signs. One individual who held a "Union Members for Trump" sign during the rally admitted to a reporter for The Detroit News that she's not a union member.

"Another person with a sign that read 'Auto Workers for Trump' said he wasn't an auto worker when asked for an interview. Both people didn't provide their names," the outlet reported.

Chris Marchione, political director of the International Union of Painters and Allied TradesDistrict Council 1M in Michigan, toldJacobin's Alex Press that at least one local "right-to-work" activist assisted the Trump campaign in organizing Wednesday's rally.

"People are trying to push that this is organic, but it's not," Marchione said. "Trump is curating a crowd, and it pisses me off. If he wants to support union workers, pay the fucking glaziers who got screwed when they put the windows on Trump Tower."

Ahead of Trump's Michigan visit, the AFL-CIO said in a statement that Trump's presidency was "catastrophic for workers," pointing to his anti-union appointments to the National Labor Relations Board, defense of so-called "right-to-work" laws, repeal of Labor Department rules aimed at protecting worker pay, and failure to protect manufacturing jobs.

"The idea that Donald Trump has ever, or will ever, care about working people is demonstrably false," said AFL-CIO president Liz Shuler. "For his entire time as president, he actively sought to roll back worker protections, wages, and the right to join a union at every level."

"UAW members are on the picket line fighting for fair wages and against the very corporate greed that Donald Trump represents," Shuler added. "Working people see through his transparent efforts to reinvent history. We are not buying the lies that Donald Trump is selling. We will continue to support and organize for the causes and candidates that represent our values."

'Doesn't Make a Damn Bit of Difference': Trump Belittles UAW Strike in Speech at Nonunion Plant

"I mean, I watch you out there with the pickets," said the former president, "but I don't think you're picketing for the right thing."

www.commondreams.org

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

Part 1

Recently, Judd Legum, proprietor of the excellent Public Information, interviewed Abraham Josephine Riesman, author of Ringmaster: Vince McMahon and the Unmaking of America, about Donald Trump’s connection to World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE).

(I haven’t been interested in wrestling (to the extent I ever was) since the early 1970s, when my dad took me to Sunnyside Gardens to see matches featuring Chief Jay Strongbow, Andre the Giant, and Bruno Sammartino.)

As Riesman makes clear, that kind of gritty spectacle continues to exert an influence on the seemingly intransigent supporters of Donald and his toxic brand. Thanks to the first two years of the Trump administration, during which 100% of the federal government was under the control of the Republican Party, and thanks to the willingness (and, in some cases, eagerness) of that party to back a fraud, thief, and traitor, that support has grown well beyond the so-called base.

I don’t know what it is about the lives of those who continue to champion or at least tolerate Donald and this party, but they are drawn to the loud and the wasteful, the dirty, the dark, and the dangerous as long as they themselves feel safe.

They don’t want a leader to look up to; they want somebody on their level, equal to or (preferably) beneath them. Somebody who doesn’t need to descend into the gutter to “fight for them” (hate for them, threaten for them) because he’s already there—and has been living there for all of his adult life.

Donald’s exaggerated displays of confidence and his refusal to play by the rules, continue to draw some people to him while the Republicans (including those who are allegedly in competition with him) continue to leave the field open for him to dominate.

Recently, “Trump or Death” flags started making an appearance. Now, what? What is the end-point of this kind of display? What will the corporate media do when Donald fails to condemn such sentiments and actually embraces the kind of rhetoric that leads to them?

It turns out we already know the answer—they will do nothing. Because that’s exactly what happened when Donald announced General Mark Milley should be put to death. As far as Donald is concerned, his followers should be willing to die or kill for him— he believes he’s worth that level of devotion. As far as the media are concerned, his latest threat is the logical extension of all of his rhetoric that has come before.

Why call it out, then—especially if doing so interferes with the horse race? They need to keep the race between Pres. Biden and Donald close. In order to do that, they obsess about Biden’s age without acknowledging his fitness and accomplishments while normalizing Donald as the Republican front-runner while failing to mention that he’s only three years younger in addition to being a cognitively impaired, fraudulent traitor to the United States.

---

It’s early days, yet, and, as the saying goes, things will get worse before they get better. Unfortunately, both the media and the Republican Party seem to be doing everything in their power to prevent the “getting better” part. The calculation behind the choices made by each of these groups is related to narrow self-interest. The media are only concerned about what will benefit their bottom line; Republicans only care about what will gain them more power. The irony of the media’s gambit, is that caving to and enabling anti-democratic forces will ultimately be fatal to journalism. The Republican Party, on the other hand, understands that the future of the party is entirely dependent on following the road map Donald left them—never admit you’re wrong, never take responsibility, and never care about the well-being of anybody other than yourself.

Burn It All Down

Belligerence in a harrowing age

marytrump.substack.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

Part 2

There are so many problems facing the United States right now. The impact of those that are beyond our control (the widespread wildfires and flooding, for example) is exacerbated when we deliberately choose to make those things worse which we could improve right now.

We could, for example, solve the epidemic of gun deaths in America, just like every other developed country has. Procedurally it would be quite easy—ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, tax bullets, strengthen loopholes, enact stricter gun laws, institute gun buy-back programs. These are policies that upwards of 70% of Americans want.

The significant minority of people who own the vast majority of guns, however, is represented by 100% of their NRA-beholden politicians, and they won’t allow it.

We could also solve—or at least significantly diminish—child poverty. How do I know that? Because we already have. But then House Republicans decided to trash the policy that improved the lives of millions of children. On the brink of our next government shutdown* (the sixth in a row since 1995 for which House Republicans are responsible), I just can’t get this chart out of my head:



In the event of a shutdown, whether it happens tonight or in November or some other time between now and the 2024 election, “The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) will quickly run out of funding and be unable to provide food for children and parents in need. In the case of a prolonged shutdown, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits may also be affected.” (For more details about how the shutdown will affect individuals and government programs, Congressman Jerrold Nadler’s (D-NY) office has a good primer.)


*[Let’s be really clear about this, a shutdown will be the deliberate choice of Kevin McCarthy and the most anti-American extremists to whom he’s beholden for his speakership. In other words, McCarthy would rather have millions of children go hungry and millions of adults out of work or working without pay than risk his ill-gotten power.]

What ever happened to collective action for good? I don’t know if you remember this, but when I was a kid, the accumulated actions of human beings since the Industrial Revolution started punching holes in the ozone layer. Cities like Los Angeles were almost constantly shrouded by thick layers of smog. Scientists identified the causes of the problem, took the necessary steps to slow the damage, and ultimately reversed it. Yet, 50 years later, when faced with problems that can be similarly solved—like climate change and COVID pandemic—we can’t get it done because we’re up against a bunch of unreconstructed anti-science, dead-end cultists who apparently believe the only desirable alternative to Donald is death.

It's not that they want to burn it all down in order to get their way—burning it down iswhat they want.

Elected Republicans at every level of government will assist these nihilists in this effort as long as the immature assholes and wannabe bullies who comprise an alarming percentage of the American electorate continue to keep them in power.

It’s time for those of us who believe in the future of American democracy start to accept the unacceptable—at least in the short term. We need to concede that 1) tens of millions of American adults are beyond reaching either because they don’t care, they’ve checked out, or, hardest of all to swallow, they’re vicious, anti-democratic thugs who want what today’s Republican Party and its de facto leader are selling; 2) the corporate media, by virtue of its lack of journalistic integrity, moral cowardice, and addiction to ratings, is firmly on the side of the fascists; and 3) there is no way to change 1) and 2) in the crucial months leading up to the 2024 election.

While it’s true that almost 12 million more people voted for Donald in 2020 than in 2016, it’s also true that 15 and a half million more people voted for the Democrat in 2020 than in 2016.

So, we run the table. We put out the fire.

---

N.B. The House just passed a temporary stop-gap measure to fund the government through mid-November with the support of 209 Democrats and 126 Republicans. It includes no funding for Ukraine, a devastating development, so it’s unclear whether the Senate will is pass it. If they do, this will create a whole other set of problems and we’ll likely be back in the same boat in November. As long as the Republicans in the House believe that holding the government hostage and making Americans suffer is their best course of action to retain power, we will always end up here.

Burn It All Down

Belligerence in a harrowing age

marytrump.substack.com